The first step involves taking the concern before the department chair in hopes of a successful resolution. On Oct. 16, Berkowitz and Nesson met with Roderick B. MacFarquhar, chair of the government department, but were unable to resolve the dispute.

According to a letter written by Berkowitz and Nesson to MacFarquhar, they discussed the ad hoc committee's disregard of the government department's recommendations, the participation of Associate Provost and Professor of Government Dennis F. Thompson in the tenure process and MacFarquhar's power to resolve the grievance.

In the letter, Berkowitz and Nesson also asked MacFarquhar to support their proposal that "the collective group of Harvard's University professors be asked to advise the University after considering both the overall process in the Berkowitz tenure review and the merits of Peter Berkowitz's case for tenure."

Nesson and Berkowitz said they would only accept an unfavorable decision if it came from this body--not from the Office of the Dean.

"Yes, if it is favorable. No, if it is not," Nesson said. "We have suggested that the matter be put to a committee composed of all Harvard's University professors. We would accept the decision of this group, favorable or not."

In the letter to MacFarguahr, Berkowitz and Nesson said they will not back down.

"We do not wish to take anyone down, though we will continue to press for what we see as Veritas until we have received fair process," they wrote.

MacFarquhar responded with a letter reasserting his support for Berkowitz--but also stating that he is ultimately powerless to change the outcome.

"I--and my colleagues, too, I believe--adopt a `win some, lose some' attitude towards tenure decisions, whether taken within the department or at Presidential level," he wrote. "And while some decisions may be particularly hard to accept, one moves on."

Since the grievance was not resolved in the meeting with MacFarquhar, Berkowitz said he will undertake the next step recommended by the guidelines--a meeting with Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Carol J. Thompson.

If this meeting is also unsuccessful, the guidelines then recommend the filing of for- mal grievance to Knowles, explaining theprocedures that have been violated and giving "adetailed account of the circumstances and groundson which the grievance is based."

After Knowles receives this complaint, he isrequired to forward it to the elected members ofthe Docket Committee of the Faculty. According tothe guidelines, this group is empowered to dismissthe complaint if it is deemed to be without merit.

If the Docket Committee does not dismiss thecase, Knowles must form an ad hoc grievancepanel--composed of Faculty members who are either serving on the Faculty Council or have servedin the past five years.

According to the guidelines, the panel is tohave three members, chosen by the grievant, therelevant department chair and the DocketCommittee. The panel conducts an informal inquiryinto the matter and the grievant and respondentare entitled to be accompanied by a Facultyadviser when appearing before the committee.

The guidelines state that the panel is meant tohave an "atmosphere of collegiality" and not toserve as a court.

Berkowitz's case could founder because theguidelines also specify that "complaints should besubmitted within eight weeks of the action ordecision that is the subject of the grievance."His tenure denial occurred over 18 months ago.

Yet Berkowitz and Nesson continue to pressforward.

"Several of our letters to officials of theUniversity administration have gone entirelyunanswered," Berkowitz said. "Answers, when theycome, seem to strengthen our case.