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."