A bitter argument early last month between two obscure Harvard employees over the use of a Holyoke Center computer has escalated into a complex, hotly contested appeal proceeding that hinges partly on charges of incompetence against two of Harvard's vice presidents, a high level University financial officer and several of its computer experts.

The allegations have raised the extraordinary prospect of a handful of Harvard's most powerful administrators defending their decisions in the press and, later this fall, in an appeal hearing. Extensive public disclosure of internal administrative disputes and errors is virtually unheard of at Harvard.

The charges of incompetence and other costly mistakes, most of which University officials either denied or declined comment on earlier this month, have been made by one of the two relatively unknown employees, Michael W. Brown-Beasley, in his hitherto unsuccessful attempt to overturn his August 4 dismissal for insubordination as assistant to the director of the Office of Fiscal Services.

In a series of interviews earlier this month, Brown-Beasley charged:

That his ex-boss, the director of the Office of Fiscal Services, is incompetent. The director, a ten-year veteran of the Harvard campus ministry named R. Jerrold Gibson '51, is a "Sancho Panza," Brown-Beasley claims, who is not qualified to direct Fiscal Services and who cannot freely use the technical advice of his own staff on computers because of a special veto power created by Hale Champion, vice president for finances;

That Joe B. Wyatt, the newly appointed vice president for administration, made costly errors on computer systems and applications recommendations in his previous positions as director of Financial Systems and Information Technology and director of the Office of Information Technology (OIT). Brown-Beasley states that the Texas-born and-bred Wyatt's dual positions constituted a conflict of interest, offering Wyatt an unfair advantage in his attempt to improve operations of the once troubled computing center;

That Financial Vice President Champion--who brought Wyatt to Harvard in 1972 and remains close to his now fellow vice president--erred in assigning Wyatt the Financial Systems post that gave him veto power over Gibson's computer decisions;

And that staff members of OIT--a little-known University organization that for a fee offers in-house advice on computer use--have repeatedly milked Fiscal Services by sloppy contract enforcement and incompetent systems and applications analysis.

Brown-Beasley has also charged that Champion and the Personnel Department have seriously mishandled his grievance case, failing to comply with requirements of the Harvard Salaried Personnel Manual and the common law tradition. In addition, he accused Edward W. Powers, associate general counsel for employee relations and Harvard's foremost labor relations troubleshooter, of telling him that the "reality" was that it would be virtually impossible to rehire Brown-Beasley even if he prevailed in his complaint. As a result, Brown-Beasley said, the University's general counsel, Daniel Steiner '54, pulled Powers off his case. Powers denies this charge, and Steiner says he has not pulled Powers off the case.

Early last week, in the first formal decision in Brown-Beasley's appeal, Champion rejected the fired employee's appeal. The vice-president had conducted a personal investigation as head of the administrative department in which Brown-Beasley works: as head of Fiscal Services, Gibson reports to Champion. On September 15, Brown-Beasley informed Harvard that he wishes to push his appeal to the next step outlined in the personnel manual, a formal, trial-like hearing held before a three-member panel. That committee will present its findings to President Bok or Steiner for a final ruling.

The refusal of several principle figures, including Gibson, to comment last week hampered attempts to obtain administrative response to many of Brown-Beasley's accusations. Thus most of the questions he has raised remain unanswered.

Brown-Beasley's charges, which he has backed with letters, memoranda and other documents, revolve around several projects in the Office of Fiscal Services. They include:

Delays, cost overruns, and incompetence in two attempts to create a computerized miscellaneous accounts receivable system (MAR), an integral part of the operations of Fiscal Services. A miscellaneous accounts receivable system is set up to bill inside and outside clients of the University for services they have received, such as Faculty Club meals, medical services, and publications.

Negligence last fall in the mailing of bursar's cards valid through 1980 to faculty members and other University officers, some of whom either had already left Harvard or whose appointments would expire within five years. The 10/80 card mailing generated fear among Harvard librarians that the cards would be used to steal books.

Delays and cost overruns in the attempt to form a new name and address (NAMAD) retrieval system for use in Fiscal Services, which requires up-to-date information on students, employees and alumni.