Guard Controversy Boils Over

This week, they took the gloves off.

In a four-hour interview Tuesday night with The Crimson, University security guard and union steward Stephen G. McCombe offered the most damning public statements about his superiors that had been uttered in the long-simmering controversy over charges of discrimination in the Harvard security guard unit.

McCombe, who has represented several guards who have charged discrimination, said his bosses engaged in "a pattern of retaliation" against some guards. He singled out four administrators, including Police Chief Paul E. Johnson and Manager of Operations for Security Robert J. Dowling, for the strongest criticism.

On Wednesday, Dowling offered his rebuttal. He said McCombe had put University guards up to coming forward with their charges. And he denied retaliating or discriminating against any guard in his unit.

Johnson, Director of Human Resources Diane B. Patrick and Assistant Director for Finance and Administration Brian D. Sinclair '62 did not return phone calls yesterday.

Dowling refused to discuss specific charges made by guards. Dowling did say that department records of each guard case would prove he did not discriminate against employees, and he also said those files contain "personal and confidential" information that may not be released.

Last spring, seven former and current security guards said their supervisors discriminated against them on the job. Most of the alleged discrimination included on-the-job harassment and discipline that was allegedly meted out unfairly.

The guards' allegations are at the center of an ongoing University investigation into the security guard unit. A probe last spring cleared security supervisors of all allegations. Earlier this month, James A. Ring, a former FBI agent hired by General Counsel Margaret H. Marshall, began interviewing guards as part of a new probe, which is being conducted under the auspices of Marshall's office.

McCombe, who as a union steward represented five of the seven guards in their complaints about treatment, this week offered what he said were new details of the guards' charges.

Dowling, for his part, said McCombe had no credibility on the issue because the union steward is engaged in a "personal vendetta" against him. He said all guards who have made charges have had full and fair hearings both inside and outside the department.

"These people you're talking about have all gone through the process," Dowling said.

So, depending on who is telling the truth, McCombe's statements may or may not shed light on charges made by guards and internal department documents obtained by The Crimson. Here are the complaints of five guards.

Pierre R. Voss

McCombe represented Voss, who is Black, when Voss appealed his July 1991 firing for allegedly being in a University building during his off-duty hours.

Voss was given his job back two weeks later. Then-General Counsel Daniel Steiner '54 explained the firing as an administrative oversight. But McCombe said he disliked how the firing of Voss was handled by the department.

"I always thought you were innocent until proven guilty," said McCombe. "Pierre was guilty until proven innocent."

McCombe said he concluded Voss was prejudged for several reasons. When McCombe asked for reports so he could compare Voss' discipline with that of other guards with similar records of infractions, he said he received documents with information about guards other than Voss blacked out. When McCombe asked Dowling about the missing information, his boss told him Associate Director for Labor Relations Carolyn R. Young '76 had blacked out the reports.

McCombe also said he was puzzled by the department's discipline of Voss for being on campus while off-duty in May 1991. McCombe said he believed guards were given staff identification cards because Harvard wants them to use University resources.

Dowling has denied the charges, saying Voss received a full hearing of his complaint.

Voss went public with his version of his firing last May. The guard also charged he was harassed about two dozen times by security supervisor Donald P. Behenna, and that Dowling condoned the harassment. Dowling denied the harassment charges and Behenna has not commented on them.

Voss said the department called a meeting a week after he made the charges public, during which Sinclair, Johnson and Dowling questioned the guard, who is out on disability, about his health. Voss said he considered the meeting harassment.

McCombe said he attended the same meeting. Sinclair said the meeting was simply called to discuss Voss' health.

McCombe also did not dispute reports that Voss, after returning to work this year, has missed work again. After spending two weeks on the "November" shift--a detail that includes frequent walking and running, Voss allegedly reinjured his back and spent more than a week in a body cast.

Rolando Diaz

Diaz, who is Hispanic, was fired in 1989 before his initial 6-month probationary period expired. He appealed the firing through his union and through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and lost.

McCombe represented Diaz in a hearing. Although he did not take issue with the decision to fire Diaz, he questioned why Diaz, who he said had troubles speaking English, had been hired in the first place.

"He did have a problem speaking English," McCombe said. "Maybe he should not have been hired as a security guard."

But McCombe also said he was troubled by the department's decision to assign to Diaz at the Business School, which many guards consider to be one of the toughest jobs in the unit.

Dowling, while saying he did not want to comment on the specifics of the case, said he was aware of the difficult nature of the Business School job. Dowling said he gave Diaz, as he does all guards, many chances to demonstrate their capability of doing their jobs properly.

Juan Figueroa

Figueroa, who is Hispanic, said just last month that he believed his firing from Harvard in April 1992 was discriminatory. The guard allegedly disobeyed a direct order to stay on his post. Richard H. Spicer, a local attorney, said Figueroa had hired him to help the former guard get his job back.

McCombe said Figueroa's firing after four years on the job was not warranted because he had never so much as received a written warning before. McCombe said the department is obligated to practice a policy of progressive discipline.

"I believe Mr. Figueroa should have been suspended for his actions, but I don't believe he should have been fired," McCombe said.

Dowling refused to say anything about the Figueroa case, citing the former guard's decision to hire an attorney.

Steven Thompson

Thompson, who is Black, was suspended for sleeping on the job in 1991. He appealed that decision, alleging that a white guard with a history of disciplinary problems had received a lesser punishment for the same infraction--sleeping on duty.

Thompson's charge of discrimination in discipline led department officials to meet with Harvard labor relations official Young and then-University Attorney Diane B. Patrick, who now is director of human resources. Both launched investigations, but no guards were interviewed for either probe.

McCombe said department officials accounted for the discrepancy in discipline by saying Thompson had "intent" to sleep. But McCombe said it was the white guard who had turned off his radio, an indication that he meant to sleep.

McCombe said there was discrimination, but he said he did not know for sure if it was racially motivated, as Thompson charged.

"By looking at the facts, I see a Black person with a problem, and a white person with a more serious problem," said McCombe. "When one group is treated differently than others, that's the definition of discrimination."

Of the charges, Dowling would only say, "If you'll check the records, Mr. Thompson still works here and [the white guard] resigned a few days later."

Russian Guard

McCombe also represented a Russian citizen, who has requested anonymity for fear of jeopardizing his immigration status, in several different complaints the guard has filed against management.

In 1989, McCombe defended the guard after he was fired by management for allegedly sleeping on duty. The guard won his job back during the grievance.

McCombe said he found two unusual circumstances in that case. One day before the Russian citizen was fired, his name had already been removed from a department roster listing seniority. And McCombe said the guard was not allowed to face his accusers--a Graduate School of Design official who said they found him sleeping on the job.

In 1992, the guard was suspended one month after writing Johnson to complain about alleged on-the-job harassment by security supervisor Thomas F. Henaghan. Henaghan denied the guard's charge, and department officials said the suspension was handed down as discipline for a confrontation in the Science Center allegedly provoked by the guard.

McCombe, however, said he believed the suspension, which came two months after the Science Center incident, was retaliation for the letter to the chief. He also said Henaghan did not sign his report of the Science Center incident as is customary.

McCombe said the guard hired handwriting analysts Carol and Paul Hennessey to analyze the report for authenticity. But when McCombe and the guard tried to get the original report, department officials refused to turn it over, according to the steward.

And last month, the guard was fired once again, after allegedly assaulting another guard. He is now appealing that decision, with McCombe as his union representative.

By all accounts, a physical confrontation did occur between the Russian guard and another guard. McCombe said he does not know who started the incident, citing a police investigation of the confrontation that was inconclusive.

But he said the Russian guard should have been able to face the other guard involved in the assault during the hearing in which he was disciplined.

Dowling refused to comment at all on the case.

Attempts to Alert

McCombe said he tried to alert University officials to the alleged problems in the department as early as 1990, but said he was not satisfied by the response.

In that year, McCombe and former guard Robert Travers, who was a union steward, wrote a letter to former General Counsel Daniel Steiner '54 asking for a meeting to discuss alleged discrimination in the unit. McCombe's letter said attempts to rectify the situation with Dowling, Johnson and Sinclair had been unsuccessful.

Steiner wrote back a month later, indicating he would not meet with the guards and directing them to solve their problem with these same department officials.

"We talked to people in the University, and we wrote the letter expecting a meeting at least," McCombe said. "When we received the letter [from Steiner], we were kind of shocked."

McCombe said he repeatedly urged Young and Patrick to perform a thorough investigation of the charges, but such an investigation never materialized. He said he is hopeful, but not optimistic, that the new investigation being conducted by Marshall and Ring will solve the alleged problem.

McCombe says he took these cases because it is his responsibility as a union steward. But Dowling says McCombe's close association with so many cases is suspicious. Dowling says McCombe has manipulated and coerced these guards, and is carrying out a personal vendetta against him.

Department sources say McCombe and Dowling were friendly before the guard became a union steward. And McCombe says Dowling used to invite him to his home and in fact recommended him for the job at Harvard.

Dowling says he never recommended McCombe for the job, and he would not comment about their relationship. He acknowledged working with McCombe in two previous jobs before they came to Harvard.

And with University officials like Johnson, Sinclair, Patrick and Steiner no longer talking about the controversy, the war of words--both public and private--between the two men has emerged at the center of the controversy.

The rift between these two men who may have once been friends is indicative of a department that by all accounts is badly divided over these complaints of discrimination. Dowling has said "untold damage" has been done to the unit because of the public complaints.

"If the integrity of the unit is challenged, it makes it tough down the road when something happens," McCombe said.

This week, two key players in the controversy over charges of discrimination in the Harvard security guard unit came forward with the most detailed public statements on the treatment of guards by supervisors. They may once have been friends, but one, an eight-year veteran of the force and a union steward, has now charged the other with being involved in...

'THESE PEOPLE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVE ALL GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS.' Robert J. Dowling, Manager of Operations for Security

'THE REASON I GOT INVOLVED WAS MY DUTY AS A UNION STEWARD. AS A GUARD, I THINK TRUTH AND JUSTICE ARE IMPORTANT. IN A POLICE UNIT, YOU EITHER HAVE THAT OR YOU HAVE ANARCHY.' Stephen G. McCombe, security guardCrimsonEric P. WinfindSecurity guard and union steward STEPHEN G. McCOMBE says he believes his superiors have mistreated several guards in the unit.

So, depending on who is telling the truth, McCombe's statements may or may not shed light on charges made by guards and internal department documents obtained by The Crimson. Here are the complaints of five guards.

Pierre R. Voss

McCombe represented Voss, who is Black, when Voss appealed his July 1991 firing for allegedly being in a University building during his off-duty hours.

Voss was given his job back two weeks later. Then-General Counsel Daniel Steiner '54 explained the firing as an administrative oversight. But McCombe said he disliked how the firing of Voss was handled by the department.

"I always thought you were innocent until proven guilty," said McCombe. "Pierre was guilty until proven innocent."

McCombe said he concluded Voss was prejudged for several reasons. When McCombe asked for reports so he could compare Voss' discipline with that of other guards with similar records of infractions, he said he received documents with information about guards other than Voss blacked out. When McCombe asked Dowling about the missing information, his boss told him Associate Director for Labor Relations Carolyn R. Young '76 had blacked out the reports.

McCombe also said he was puzzled by the department's discipline of Voss for being on campus while off-duty in May 1991. McCombe said he believed guards were given staff identification cards because Harvard wants them to use University resources.

Dowling has denied the charges, saying Voss received a full hearing of his complaint.

Voss went public with his version of his firing last May. The guard also charged he was harassed about two dozen times by security supervisor Donald P. Behenna, and that Dowling condoned the harassment. Dowling denied the harassment charges and Behenna has not commented on them.

Voss said the department called a meeting a week after he made the charges public, during which Sinclair, Johnson and Dowling questioned the guard, who is out on disability, about his health. Voss said he considered the meeting harassment.

McCombe said he attended the same meeting. Sinclair said the meeting was simply called to discuss Voss' health.

McCombe also did not dispute reports that Voss, after returning to work this year, has missed work again. After spending two weeks on the "November" shift--a detail that includes frequent walking and running, Voss allegedly reinjured his back and spent more than a week in a body cast.

Rolando Diaz

Diaz, who is Hispanic, was fired in 1989 before his initial 6-month probationary period expired. He appealed the firing through his union and through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and lost.

McCombe represented Diaz in a hearing. Although he did not take issue with the decision to fire Diaz, he questioned why Diaz, who he said had troubles speaking English, had been hired in the first place.

"He did have a problem speaking English," McCombe said. "Maybe he should not have been hired as a security guard."

But McCombe also said he was troubled by the department's decision to assign to Diaz at the Business School, which many guards consider to be one of the toughest jobs in the unit.

Dowling, while saying he did not want to comment on the specifics of the case, said he was aware of the difficult nature of the Business School job. Dowling said he gave Diaz, as he does all guards, many chances to demonstrate their capability of doing their jobs properly.

Juan Figueroa

Figueroa, who is Hispanic, said just last month that he believed his firing from Harvard in April 1992 was discriminatory. The guard allegedly disobeyed a direct order to stay on his post. Richard H. Spicer, a local attorney, said Figueroa had hired him to help the former guard get his job back.

McCombe said Figueroa's firing after four years on the job was not warranted because he had never so much as received a written warning before. McCombe said the department is obligated to practice a policy of progressive discipline.

"I believe Mr. Figueroa should have been suspended for his actions, but I don't believe he should have been fired," McCombe said.

Dowling refused to say anything about the Figueroa case, citing the former guard's decision to hire an attorney.

Steven Thompson

Thompson, who is Black, was suspended for sleeping on the job in 1991. He appealed that decision, alleging that a white guard with a history of disciplinary problems had received a lesser punishment for the same infraction--sleeping on duty.

Thompson's charge of discrimination in discipline led department officials to meet with Harvard labor relations official Young and then-University Attorney Diane B. Patrick, who now is director of human resources. Both launched investigations, but no guards were interviewed for either probe.

McCombe said department officials accounted for the discrepancy in discipline by saying Thompson had "intent" to sleep. But McCombe said it was the white guard who had turned off his radio, an indication that he meant to sleep.

McCombe said there was discrimination, but he said he did not know for sure if it was racially motivated, as Thompson charged.

"By looking at the facts, I see a Black person with a problem, and a white person with a more serious problem," said McCombe. "When one group is treated differently than others, that's the definition of discrimination."

Of the charges, Dowling would only say, "If you'll check the records, Mr. Thompson still works here and [the white guard] resigned a few days later."

Russian Guard

McCombe also represented a Russian citizen, who has requested anonymity for fear of jeopardizing his immigration status, in several different complaints the guard has filed against management.

In 1989, McCombe defended the guard after he was fired by management for allegedly sleeping on duty. The guard won his job back during the grievance.

McCombe said he found two unusual circumstances in that case. One day before the Russian citizen was fired, his name had already been removed from a department roster listing seniority. And McCombe said the guard was not allowed to face his accusers--a Graduate School of Design official who said they found him sleeping on the job.

In 1992, the guard was suspended one month after writing Johnson to complain about alleged on-the-job harassment by security supervisor Thomas F. Henaghan. Henaghan denied the guard's charge, and department officials said the suspension was handed down as discipline for a confrontation in the Science Center allegedly provoked by the guard.

McCombe, however, said he believed the suspension, which came two months after the Science Center incident, was retaliation for the letter to the chief. He also said Henaghan did not sign his report of the Science Center incident as is customary.

McCombe said the guard hired handwriting analysts Carol and Paul Hennessey to analyze the report for authenticity. But when McCombe and the guard tried to get the original report, department officials refused to turn it over, according to the steward.

And last month, the guard was fired once again, after allegedly assaulting another guard. He is now appealing that decision, with McCombe as his union representative.

By all accounts, a physical confrontation did occur between the Russian guard and another guard. McCombe said he does not know who started the incident, citing a police investigation of the confrontation that was inconclusive.

But he said the Russian guard should have been able to face the other guard involved in the assault during the hearing in which he was disciplined.

Dowling refused to comment at all on the case.

Attempts to Alert

McCombe said he tried to alert University officials to the alleged problems in the department as early as 1990, but said he was not satisfied by the response.

In that year, McCombe and former guard Robert Travers, who was a union steward, wrote a letter to former General Counsel Daniel Steiner '54 asking for a meeting to discuss alleged discrimination in the unit. McCombe's letter said attempts to rectify the situation with Dowling, Johnson and Sinclair had been unsuccessful.

Steiner wrote back a month later, indicating he would not meet with the guards and directing them to solve their problem with these same department officials.

"We talked to people in the University, and we wrote the letter expecting a meeting at least," McCombe said. "When we received the letter [from Steiner], we were kind of shocked."

McCombe said he repeatedly urged Young and Patrick to perform a thorough investigation of the charges, but such an investigation never materialized. He said he is hopeful, but not optimistic, that the new investigation being conducted by Marshall and Ring will solve the alleged problem.

McCombe says he took these cases because it is his responsibility as a union steward. But Dowling says McCombe's close association with so many cases is suspicious. Dowling says McCombe has manipulated and coerced these guards, and is carrying out a personal vendetta against him.

Department sources say McCombe and Dowling were friendly before the guard became a union steward. And McCombe says Dowling used to invite him to his home and in fact recommended him for the job at Harvard.

Dowling says he never recommended McCombe for the job, and he would not comment about their relationship. He acknowledged working with McCombe in two previous jobs before they came to Harvard.

And with University officials like Johnson, Sinclair, Patrick and Steiner no longer talking about the controversy, the war of words--both public and private--between the two men has emerged at the center of the controversy.

The rift between these two men who may have once been friends is indicative of a department that by all accounts is badly divided over these complaints of discrimination. Dowling has said "untold damage" has been done to the unit because of the public complaints.

"If the integrity of the unit is challenged, it makes it tough down the road when something happens," McCombe said.

This week, two key players in the controversy over charges of discrimination in the Harvard security guard unit came forward with the most detailed public statements on the treatment of guards by supervisors. They may once have been friends, but one, an eight-year veteran of the force and a union steward, has now charged the other with being involved in...

'THESE PEOPLE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVE ALL GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS.' Robert J. Dowling, Manager of Operations for Security

'THE REASON I GOT INVOLVED WAS MY DUTY AS A UNION STEWARD. AS A GUARD, I THINK TRUTH AND JUSTICE ARE IMPORTANT. IN A POLICE UNIT, YOU EITHER HAVE THAT OR YOU HAVE ANARCHY.' Stephen G. McCombe, security guardCrimsonEric P. WinfindSecurity guard and union steward STEPHEN G. McCOMBE says he believes his superiors have mistreated several guards in the unit.