No Protection

Chief of Police Paul E. Johnson has long been nicknamed "No Waves" by his officers. Now we know why. As charges of racial harassment multiply in the University security guard, Johnson has steadfastly maintained that is no problem in his unit.

Until recently, the Administration also remained silent on this pressing concern. Last week, Dean of Students Archie C. Epps III finally acknowledged that complaints from some University guards present a "serious problem" for the community.

Epps' reaction is the very first by an upper-level administrator, even though the complaints have been leveled for over a year. While we appreciate his concern, the University and Harvard Police have been too slow in addressing these charges. Moreover, a stronger response from other University officials coupled with a complete investigation is necessary.

A little context: Some of Harvard's 108 guards--those who watch over our museums, houses and libraries--say they're racially harassed by their supervisors and that they have been retaliated against for complaining. The first such complaint was made in September 1991, and the General Counsel's office, then run by Daniel Steiner '54, promised to look into the matter.

Nine months later, Steiner said his office had investigated the complaints and found only "a perception" of racism in the department, but no actual racial harassment.

But the "investigation" was shoddy at best. In addition to taking months to complete it, University attorney Diane B. Patrick, who ran the investigation, produced no written report detailing her findings. Even worse, all of the minority guards who charged harassment said Patrick hadn't spoken to them during her inquiry.

Patrick later said that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) had investigated the charges and come to similar conclusions. But MCAD only looked into two cases of harassment, and the charges persist.

To discount the seven guards' complaints is to charge them all with being conspiratorial liars out to destroy the reputations of Donald P. Behenna (a security supervisor) and Robert J. Dowling (manager of operations for security and Behenna's boss and friend), who bear the brunt of the charges. But the University has admitted that Behenna underwent "retraining" of an unspecified nature shortly after this paper reported the complaints against him. Regardless of whether or not these specific charges are true, they deserve a fuller hearing.

Police Chief Paul E. Johnson has consistently shuffled complaints against supervisors down the line to Dowling, who hasn't shown much interest in pursuing the charges against his coworkers and friends. And Acting General Counsel Frank J. Connors has alienated many of the guards by saying they were using the complaints as a "crutch" to explain away own disciplinary problems.

The administration's bungling of the guards' complaints reveals a disturbing lack of attention to a group we could so easily overlook. If seven tenured professors leveled the same charges, University Hall would turn itself over trying to get to the bottom of the accusations.

The full investigation of these complaints should be the first priority of new General Counsel Margaret H. Marshall.

How can we expect the guards to protect us if nobody's looking out for them?