Harvard officials have yet to answer a set of state and federal complaints charging racial harassment and discrimination in the Freshman Union dining hall, more than two months after the deadline for a response passed.
Meanwhile, several co-workers of the during services employee who filed the complaints--and who was subsequently fired--echoed his charges of discrimination and on the job mistreatment in interviews with The Crimson yesterday.
The workers said morale at the Union is low and blasted management officials for inaccessibility and favoritism.
The complaints were filed in December by Darryl Hicks, a former cook and labor union shop steward who was fired last week. Hicks, who worked in the College's largest dining hall for more than five years, had said he was harassed on the job and denied a promotion because he is Black and works as a steward.
According to a field investigator assigned to the case. Harvard had until late January to respond to the charges, which were lodged with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) and the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
"Procedurally, they are now in violation," said the MCAD investigator, who asked not to be identified. "We're hoping that they'll be submitting the information soon."
According to University Attorney Anne Taylor, the delay in filing the response was "a mistake" that occurred when the case was reassigned to her from former University Attorney Diane B. Patrick. This summer, Patrick became human resources director for the University.
"It got lost," Taylor said of the complaint. "It's not in any way a common thing."
Taylor said the University's "extensive response to the complaint" "[There was] absolutely no discrimination against Mr. Hicks on the basis of race or any other ground," Taylor said. "I have sufficient information that I am completely comfortable that the University acted appropriately." Taylor and Dining Services Director Michael P. Berry declined to comment on specific events leading to Hicks' termination. In Berry's letter to Hicks informing him of the action, he said Hicks was fired because of "unacceptable performance and conduct as an employee." But Hicks, who released to The Crimson a lengthy record of disciplinary action against him dating back several years, said the charges are without foundation. Hicks said much of the disciplinary record is based on the racist charges of several fellow employees, and the rest is part of an attempt by the administration to silence his union activities. In interviews yesterday, several workers at the Freshman Union supported Hicks, noting that a majority of his co-workers had elected him their union steward in 1990. "He's good. He fights for us. He's a nice guy," said Ramon Martinez, who has worked at the Union for six years. "When we need him, he's there." Several of the workers asked not to be identified because they feared reprisals from dining hall managers. "I don't think he should have gotten fired," said one employee. "He opens people's eyes." "I know he does a good job [and] I support him," said another. "He's a very good shop steward. He always said, 'If you have any problems, you come [to me] and we'll go downstairs [to talk with the managers]." "They don't like him because he's a fighter," added another. Several workers echoed Hicks' claims of discrimination at the dining hall. "I've been discriminated against," said one. "I was told I was too short for serving in the line, after I'd been serving on line for three years." "It's a tough place to work, especially if you're a Black or a minority," said another, adding that the administration often seeks reprisals against vocal labor union stewards. "That organization is pretty rugged there...You've got to be tough to work there." "Management all has their little favorites," said one of the employees. The workers interviewed were divided on Hicks' claims that employees segregate themselves by race. Hicks asserted that a large majority of Portuguese employees avoid contact with a minority of Black, white and Puerto Rican workers. Workers interviewed did back Hicks' assertions of low staff morale, and they corroborated his allegations that workers are forced to work when they are sick. "Morale sucks," said one. "A lot of people are so intimidated, they come in [even when they are sick]." "I am literally scared," said another. Berry yesterday denied that employees must work when they are sick, though he said the dining services administration is seeking to cut down on abuses of sick leave. "They are not being called in on their sick days...I'd like to have someone show me one instance," Berry said in an interview. "We are toughening up on people with excessive absenteeism...When there's a pattern established, then we warn them." Several workers at the Freshman Union disputed Berry's claims. "They get suspicious whenever you call [in sick]," said one. The workers also said Berry is not as accessible as he claims to be. "Berry has a problem. He comes up here and doesn't even acknowledge you," said one. "At first, I used to see him sitting here with us. Now I don't see him anymore," said another. Berry denied the charges. "I'm not an ogre at all," he said. "If you see me in the houses, you don't see people cowering away from me. They're not running away from me." "If there was something that was bothering them, they would tell me," he added. "I really have a good rapport with them." Some workers interviewed supported Berry, saying he was a better more accessible leader than his predecessor, Frank J. Weissbecker. At least one worker, however, disagreed with Berry's assessment. "When [Berry first arrived], he said feel free to come to my office. I thought it was an open door," he said. "I had a problem and I went over there...I have a letter to document. [Berry said] he wouldn't speak to me directly again unless I go to [the Freshman Union managers] first." "I felt this is a no-win situation," the worker said.
Read more in News
Waters Urges Black Activism
