"We operate on the assumption that the University is not going to change its policies until they become too embarrassing to sustain," Offner says. But this tactic has its limits. The anti-sweatshop campaign won easier victories because it did not run counter to any set University rule and it required little effort on Harvard's part to comply.

The living wage campaign has encountered stiffer administrative resistance despite a more ambitious program of public rallies. The potentially high cost of concessions--in terms of money and bargaining power--in this case makes the administration more resistant to change.

No Sweat

PSLM has achieved its greatest success in the anti-sweatshop campaign.

The campaign began in the spring of 1998, when PSLM invited Dominican workers to speak to students about factory conditions.

The group then began holding rallies on the steps of Widener Library, calling for Harvard to adopt a policy of full disclosure, requiring its licensees to release the names and locations of its factories.

At March's "Rally for Justice," as 350 students gathered in front of University Hall during a Faculty meeting, PSLM member Elizabeth C. Vladeck '99 told the crowd through a megaphone that the University had agreed to full disclosure.

"This [issue]arose with the students, not with the administration," says University attorney Allan A. Ryan Jr., Harvard's point person on the issue of sweatshop policy.