Budget cuts are never easy to make. But this year, Harvard has singled out one of its most direly needed programs for cuts. In renegotiating its contract with the Harvard Union of Clerical and Technical Workers (HUCTW), Harvard has slated workers earning less than $15,000 per year for cuts in benefits.

These workers need child care and medical benefits more than any other employees of the University. Faculty and administrators, whose salaries are at least three times higher than the salaries of those workers whose benefits will be cut, are much better equipped to deal with decreases. Why has Harvard made this regressive move?

The University could argue that many of these workers are married and have access to benefits from more than one salary. This argument could just as easily be applied to any other sector of the University's labor force.

It is more probable that Harvard fears its star faculty and experienced administrators would leave if their health and child care benefits--already the best by far in the nation--were curtailed. From the perspective of a University that sometimes courts tenured professors for years, HUCTW's workers are easily replaceable.

But chances are that much more than benefits bind faculty to their jobs at Harvard. Given the tenor of recent benefits debates involving the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, this situation seems especially likely. A combination of research facilities, world-renowned faculty and--dare we say?--students such as those found at Harvard can't easily be duplicated anywhere else.

And who knows? Some faculty members might even approve of the University taking a more progressive approach to budget cuts. If sacrifice must be made across the board, so be it. But those who can least afford sacrifice should not bear the heaviest burden.