Although this week's "painters' helper" protest has concentrated on one specific issue, the charges of "University racism" that the protest has spawned-are sure to raise larger questions concerning Harvard's performance as an employer of minority groups.

In dealing with the paint-crew issue. University officials have often lacked the facts they needed to answer a student's detailed questions. At Tuesday's press conference, for example, the directors of the Personnel and Buildings-and-Grounds departments admitted that they could not answer some of the specific charges the students made.

NEWS ANALYSIS

On more general questions, however, the University has built up a substantial body of evidence to document its policy and record.

Formal Statement

The most recent pronouncement came on November 3, when the Corporation adopted a formal statement on equal-employment hiring.

The statement outlined the administration's responsibility for overseeing various parts of its fair-hiring programs, and it emphasized "the need for continuing and expanding positive programs which will assure the strengthening" of policies of "non-discri-mination and equal-employment opportunity."

There was little startling news in the statement. As John B. Butler, director of Personnel, said, it "put together on one piece of paper what had been the common law of the University. It stated the broad policies succinctly."

According to the statement's last paragraph, the reason for publicizing the University policy was "so that each member of the community will understand its importance and their individual responsibility to contribute toward its maximum fulfillment."

Maximum Emphasis

Many administrators agree that the statement's main purpose was to put maximum emphasis on a policy Harvard feels is important.

But some officials say there may have been another factor in the timing and exact wording of the statement: Harvard's desire to avoid any difficulties with Federal civil rights regulations.

Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Executive Order 11246, all groups receiving Federal funds-including universities with Federal research contracts-must prove to the government that their employment policies guarantee equal opportunities for minority groups.

Atomic Energy

Until last June, each university had its performance reviewed by the agency that provided the largest research grant. For Harvard, that meant the Atomic Energy Commission.

Over the summer, there was a general reorganization of the civil rights compliance system. Under the new arrangement, all universities must make their equal-employment reports to the Department of Health. Education and Welfare.

At the same time. there was an important semantic change in the equal-employment guidelines universities have to follow. Instead of the old regulation-which required the university to correct immediately any problem that appeared-the new guideline says the university must have "affirmative action" programs to promote minority hiring.

Several large universities-including Princeton, M.I.T., and Yale-have learned in the last few months that HEW is serious about the clause. Each of them received a letter from HEW asking for evidence of "affirmative action" before Federal contracts would be renewed.

Harvard has not received a letter, but its Electron Accelerator contract is up for renewal soon. The Corporation's statement should eliminate any troubles with the government: a contract compliance officer in HEW said last week that the statement "appears to satisfy all our requirements."