In a landmark decision, New York City’s highest court granted same-sex domestic partners the right to access employer-sponsored health benefits. In addition to recognizing the validity of same-sex domestic partnership, which is used in states across the nation as a legal means of documenting and affirming a relationship between a same-sex couple and granting them rights equivalent to those of married couples, this decision will allow CUNY to extend employee and retiree health benefits to unmarried same-sex partners in much the same way as it provides these benefits to married opposite-sex spouses of its employees and retirees.

Federal workers are also poised to gain increased access to retirement benefits for their same-sex domestic partners, as the result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Windsor v. U.S.

In the past, when an individual dies and leaves a defined-benefit pension plan Get the full story to a same-sex partner or other non-spouse beneficiary, surviving partners or beneficiaries were forced to withdraw the entire amount of the account in one lump sum, incurring immediate tax charges. Under the new rules, surviving partners can choose to draw down their pension in increments over five years, or over their own lifetimes, avoiding immediate tax charges.

Federal employees should also be aware of the new spousal rights available to them under the new Social Security rules, which took effect in April. Married same-sex couples now have the same spousal rights as married opposite-sex couples, including access to Medicare spousal benefits. This includes the ability to use their spouse’s work credits to qualify for premium-free Part A hospital coverage (which requires 40 work credits).

The Social Security changes are the latest of many steps toward equality in the workplace and in retirement planning. Despite these advances, a great deal of work remains to be done. For example, a few more states need to pass laws allowing same-sex partners to register their relationships so they can receive benefits like marriage, and many employers still do not offer health insurance that is open to same-sex partners.

In fact, the percentage of firms that provide health care that is open to same-sex partners varies by worker groups, with unionized establishments being more likely than others to offer benefits that are accessible to domestic partners. This is largely because unionized employers often have the opportunity to negotiate with their employers on issues such as benefit policies. Likewise, larger establishments were more likely to have benefits that are accessible to same-sex partners than smaller ones. Similarly, a greater percentage of full-time workers had access to health benefits that are accessible to same-sex domestic partners than part-time workers. However, this was not always the case, with the proportion of full-time workers who had access to such benefits varying by firm size. Among the largest firms, only 28 percent had such benefits, while 51 percent of small firms did so. This disparity is even more pronounced when the percentage of full-time and part-time workers in each group is examined.