zoom

sdr42890:

keithkurson:

sdr42890:

keithkurson:

cheesierthanthemoon:

Google to offer gay staff extra pay to allow for tax inequality with straight couples

Internet giant Google today began paying its gay staff more than heterosexual employees in the latest example of its lavish perks culture, reports The Daily Mail.

Lesbian and homosexual staff will get extra wages to make up for higher taxes they have to pay.

The search engine decided it was only fair to bump up the salaries of its gay staff, a spokesman said.

Under U.S. law, when a firm offers health insurance as a benefit for an employee’s partner, it is tax-free for married couples but taxable income for  gays.

Google will make up the difference in additional pay, on average $980 a year.

Google is already one of the best companies in the world to work for, a few of my friends are having the time of their lives there. THERE IS A SLIDE TO GET BETWEEN FLOORS in a few of the buildings. It’s insane, and I’m glad that they’re continuing to do right by their employees!

Honestly, I don’t think this is a good idea. It’s a nice thought behind it, but in my opinion, gone about the wrong way. If they pay all lgbt people more than all straight people just because straight people can get married, then what about the people, of all genders and all orientations including cis-het, who don’t want to get married or who desperately do want to get married and can’t find someone? If they’re going to do this for equality, then they should do it all the way and let everyone make an equal amount regardless of whether or not they’re married or in a relationship or single. Let all single employees make extra to put them on equal footing with their married counterparts, regardless of sexual orientation or gender.

And if they are just trying to make it as though gay marriage were legal, are they only giving it to lgbt people who have a longtime partner or who live with their partners or just anyone who claims to be lgbt? That would make sense and be fair, but how would they prove that they’re in a relationship that would be a marriage if it could be? How would they even prove they were actually gay? Because honestly, if I were a single straight person working there and there was no requirement like proving you’re in a relationship, I’d claim to be gay or bi for the extra money. Because I don’t think it’s fair that only people who are good-looking enough and sociable/confident/flirty enough to find a partner should get extra benefits and money, regardless of whether they’re straight or gay or bi or whatever. Especially if all gay people are going to get the extra money, even if they aren’t actually trying to pay for the health insurance of their partner because they don’t have one. This just doesn’t seem to make sense to me when you think about how this new rule is going to be applied in real life. 

But that’s really interesting about the slide, it does seem like they’re good people to work for. 

That’s not really the point. The point is that people who do want to get married and are in committed relationships can get the same benefits as the people who can get married. 

If you don’t want to get married or never plan to get married, you aren’t going to be interested in the benefits that the government offers for people who are married.

Yeah, I get that. I’m just saying, if they offer ALL people who identify as gay a pay bonus to compensate for that, how will that possibly work? How can they prove which lgbt employees would be married if they could be and which wouldn’t? Would you have to prove you live with someone or something of that nature? Because the OP said that ALL gay people would get more money. Then the question becomes, how would they prove who is gay and who isn’t? Because if ALL gay people get it, single or in a committed relationship, then all single straight people are going to start claiming that they’re gay to get it too. And even if the point is to make it so that they can afford their partner’s health insurance and other benefits, what they’re giving them is a pay bonus, which theoretically could be used for anything. And therefore if single gay people are getting extra money to do whatever they want with, it’s only fair that single straight people get it too. Because it isn’t about the benefits for your partner anymore if they do this, it’s about money, and it’s only fair that everyone is paid equally despite of gender, orientation, or relationship status. And I’m sure they’ll realize it and start claiming to be gay for the money and honestly, who could blame them? Do you see what I’m saying? I don’t know how this will end up working out. Unless the OP didn’t explain their plan well enough, because I’m basing my opinion off what the OP said alone because I don’t know what’s going on. 

Suzette speaks sense. This is a nice gesture from Google, but utterly and totally impractical. It’s a lovely theory that makes absolutely no sense in practice. There’s no way to prove you’re in a relationship equivalent to a heterosexual marriage, there’s no way to prove your sexuality, there’s no way to say single homosexuals and heterosexuals are exempt - it just makes no sense. I understand that it’s an essential measure to ensure equality and compensate for financial losses as a result of a lack of legal standing, but that’s the PROBLEM - there’s no legal standing thus no way to prove anything in a financial sense. Google are dealing with the symptom rather than the cause. This is a band aid that’s going to slip off, or just not stick in the first place. People are going to con the system by saying they’re gay and claiming the benefits and no one will be able to disprove them, because sexuality is an orientation and an identity rather than something tangible for documentation, and that will undermine the gesture, undermine the plight for equal benefits and standing, and thus undermine the entire LGBT movement.