Lawyer advises Utah employers regarding same-sex couples

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

SALT LAKE CITY – Same-sex couples who were married in Utah before a federal judge ordered a stay are facing uncertainty, and so are their employers.

Utah officials have said Utah is not recognizing same-sex marriages that were performed in the state, while US Attorney General Eric Holder has announced the federal government is recognizing the marriages.

The stay is in place until a decision is made on a pending legal appeal, but Utah employers will have to decide whether to follow the federal or the state position on same-sex couples when it comes to employee benefits.

Greg Saylin is an attorney specializing in labor and employment, and he said employers are likely better off following the federal government’s lead on this issue.

“We recommend to an employer who has an employee who has entered into a same-sex marriage in Utah and comes to them to tell them of the change in circumstance that they recognize the marriage for the purposes of employee benefits,” he said.

Saylin said employers run a greater risk by not recognizing the marriages than they do if they should recognize the marriage.


  • Mobious One

    Everyone get ready for the bigoted comments and everyone’s cherry picked bible quotes that support their bigotry. Oh, and more comments about how LGBT community is pushing their beliefs on them…. They’re losing freedom and it angers them (the freedom to deny freedom to others). Then the comments about how the majority 10 years ago voted to add an unconstitutional amendment to the state constitution.

  • Oh bite me

    We’ll I thought there would be more bible thumping….. None…not one thump…I’m a little disappointed.

    • Mobious One

      I thought the same thing. You know, the vast majority of Christians could careless how other people live their lives. The Christian extremists are the minority. Unfortunately they’re the loudest. I’m positive that if this was voted on now, they’d find the majority of the state is no longer opposed to SSM. And most of the one’s that are, aren’t so opposed that they’d be willing to waste $2 Mill on a battle they can’t win.

      You should read the brief that the state filed. I kid you not, they literally said “We are not ruled by experts.” So, this appeal might go faster than I thought. There’s more in there than that. The state’s argument is pathetic. Unfortunately a wealthy law firm with be $2 Mill wealthier for nothing.

Comments are closed.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.