WITH TIME comes perspective. In the case of Watergate, perspective gave rise to "hindsight;" in the world of football, it created the Monday morning quarterback; and in the dispute between Harvard and the Buildings & Grounds (B&G) carpenters, the passage of time has tempered emotions, turning a blazing confrontation into a controlled flame.

The B&G conflict began when the University reassigned carpenters to jobs outside their craft. Claiming a shortage of carpentry work, Harvard asked some of the carpenters to work as painters, lampers and roofers. The University stressed that the reassignments were "temporary, and involved no cut in pay;" however, the carpenters saw the move as a threat to their job security.

As one carpenter said during the first day of the strike, "You have to stick with what you know. They want me to paint and I'm just not a painter. I would not be doing the job right and might mess it up." The carpenters feel strongly that they should work only at the jobs for which they were trained.

That's an understandable desire, but Edward W. Powers, associate general counsel for employee relations, said, "We just don't have enough carpentry work for them right now." Powers's contention is the heart of the dispute. While the University contends there is not enough in-trade work for the 56 B&G carpenters, the union alleges that Harvard has enough work, but is contracting some of it out to independent firms. Union officials have not yet cited any specific cases of this outside contracting.

Powers says the union cannot be specific because "there are no such cases." He said that the only outside contracting he knows of is on major construction and renovation jobs which "are not normally covered by B&G carpenters."

Yet Powers's blanket denial proved questionable during the second day of the strike when a man working in the Leverett House small dining room identified himself as a carpenter working for an independent contractor. Powers said he had no knowledge of the Leverett situation. While the union and the University argued back and forth--the union accusing the University of disregarding its employees, and the University calling the carpenters' requests "unreasonable"--the B&G employees walked out.

MANNING PICKET LINES for four days at various sites throughout the University, more than 200 B&G employees joined the strike in support of the protesting carpenters. The non-carpenter B&G workers, all members of the Maintenance Trades Council of Boston (MTC), had voted on the night of March 20 to join the walkout.

Under the present agreement between Harvard and the MTC, the union must give the University 30 days notice prior to causing any "direct or indirect interference with the University's operations." Harvard claimed the B&G action was "clearly illegal" because no prior notice had been given. Enraged by the union action, University officials said they would not talk to the striking union. "It's not our business" to negotiate with the union when it is "striking illegally," Powers said. But that was just an initial impulse.

James P. Costello, general agent for Local 40--the B&G carpenters' branch of the MTC--countered the University allegations of illegality, saying that the Harvard-MTC agreement "does not deal with a dispute over job security." Once again, as in the disagreement over contracting-out work, the two sides contradicted each other. This time, though, the University, not the union, took action.

Harvard threatened to file suit against the locals and internationals involved in the job action to recover all damages incurred because of the strike. Daniel Steiner '54, general counsel for the University, said last week that Harvard had compiled all the necessary papers, but had not yet decided whether it would actually go to court. The suit still stands ready and waiting, but inactive.

For four days, the workers stayed off the job, forcing B&G to operate at minimum levels, providing little more than emergency and necessity services. But as the College emptied out for the spring recess, the B&G workers quietly agreed to return to their jobs. Late in the afternoon of March 24, B&G operations were returning to normal.

The tempers subsided, the wild accusations died down, the pickets ended, and the problems still persisted. On March 31, Harvard notified four B&G carpenters that they were to report for work on April 3 ready to accept painting assignments. The University enforced the order with the stipulation that if the workers did not report, they would be taken off the payroll.

When union officials said on April 2 that they believed the carpenters would refuse to report, it looked like everything was going to start up again. But the workers reported as requested, and the conflict slipped off unnoticed--except for one thing.

With the strike over and the workers back in their jobs, the University notified them that all the employees who had participated in the walkout would be suspended for two days, without pay. Costello said the union planned to file a grievance protesting the suspensions, and another conflict looked imminent.

But tempers had cooled, and officials for both the union and the University remained calm. They acknowledged that differences still existed, but said the two sides had to "resolve all the issues at the bargaining table." Reassignment still existed, and the workers were still unhappy with the policy; but everyone had decided it was time to sit down and talk.

YET EVEN TALKING seems to be a problem in this case. The last contract between Harvard and the MTC expired last December; however, the University and the union have consented to extend the agreement so that the employees are still working under the terms of that contract. The two sides met once in February, and once more on March 10 to discuss the issues. Since then, there has been no negotiating. Powers had said he hoped for a meeting during the first week of April, and Costello had also hinted at that possibility; but nothing developed.

Everyone said it was scheduling problems. Federal mediator Jerry Gomez was working on arranging talks for last week, and then he was hoping for this week. Yesterday he said there was a good chance for a meeting sometime next week. That's been the tone of the talks: postponement.

There are many issues that will need extensive discussion; the reassignment controversy is just one problem, although it is the most sensitive. University and union sources have declined to specify the other issues, calling the negotiation process a "delicate situation" which they say demands silence; but no one denies that there are many things to be discussed.

The walkout is over and only quiet discontent remains. Powers had said he hoped the University would have more carpentry work by March 31, but that date passed with no change in workload. The carpenters still contend the University is using outside contractors; Harvard still denies it. It's been almost a month, and many skirmishes have passed without any resolutions being achieved. With time, the fire has burned down, but the ashes are still smoldering.