Powers also said that no custodial or food services employees have ever been laid off as a result of contracting out.

Scott said Harvard conducts studies into possible areas for contracting out and actively solicits advice from the community here and from outside specialists. He theorized the search for alternatives to in-house employment may have intensified after universities were hit by inflation in the sixties.

Scott said he considers contracting out as a good alternative for saving Harvard money, but added that many factors must be taken into consideration before a decision can be reached. He also said that the College has, in some cases, moved from contracting out to in-house work in the interests of efficiency.

Currently, the College does most of its own copying, payrolling and similar work, Scott said.

"It's the kind of thing where we try to minimize costs and make changes and still be sensitive," Scott said.

Besides the variations in union strengths, one reason Harvard only contracts out certain types of work is the variation of the importance of labor costs, Power said. "In custodial work, the cost is basically all labor, but in food services, labor costs make up about 40 percent of the total." Consequently, custodial employees are more susceptible to competitive prices from outside firms.

But if the University does decide to contract out, compensation agreements reached with workers in an area to be subcontracted depend on the specific situations, negotiators said. In the case of ISS, workers were given the choice between a new job with ISS, which in turn was promised a minimum number of contracts, or a large severance award.

Powers attributed some but not all of Harvard's labor inefficiencies to Unions.

"If you look at the steel and auto industries in the U.S. which are union and at their foreign, non-union competition, you'll see there's a major difference [in efficiency]," he said. But Powers added that the University is trying to be as cost-effective as possible. "I don't think it's just the unions--in the structural trades and the custodial services, many contractors are unionized," he said.

Powers added that University unions generally object more when the contracts will be going to non-union companies, but added that the work goes to both union and non-union firms.

While not-all of Harvard's local unions have fought contracting out as hard and as successfully as the food workers, many employees appear to be frightened. Some are trying to convince Harvard not to go out of the business of their particular trade by improving efficiency and demonstrating that they can do the job as well as outsiders could. One union leader who asked not to be identified said his workers were trying to improve. "We're trying to prove it would be worth more for Harvard not to subcontract. We're doing it by example," he said.

Childes said the University's policy "busted up" the trade unions. "It's a direct threat to us," he said. "We have enough staff-that we can serve anything at Harvard and don't need outside help."

"It makes you feel insecure in your job," Childes said. "Unemployment's up and we know it, so they use [contracting] to threaten us."

Contractors, on the other hand, say they are happy with the changes.

Edward W. Owens Jr., ISS project manager said his company recently hired 54 new workers. Owens also expressed confidence in what lies ahead for subcontractors. "It's a trend all right," he said. "I think more institutions are doing it--academic institutions, health care institutions, the government."