Consumer Committee Disputes Corporation's Boycott Policy

A student-faculty committee designed to devise University policy on consumer affairs is currently at odds with administrators and the Corporation over whether the University should consider boycotting corporate products such as Nestle's.

Archie C. Epps III, dean of students and co-ordinator of the committee, said yesterday that the committee has not ruled out a boycott as a possible policy for the University.

Boycott

Epps said the committee's recommendations will be ready in mid-March.

"We've discussed many alternatives, including several kinds of boycott," Epps said, adding that the group is considering University policy on boycotts in general.

But Hugh Calkins, chairman of the Corporation Committee on Harvard Shareholder Responsibility, recently wrote a letter to Corey B. Stone '79--who advocates the boycotting of Nestle's--stating that the Corporation will definitely not consider a dining hall boycott of Nestle products. Stone said Wednesday.

Calkins said yesterday he had concluded that this was accepted policy after a recent discussion with Joe B. Wyatt, vice president for Administration.

Wyatt said yesterday that he learned of the policy to exclude boycotting as a policy during a discussion with the committee in December.

"I don't remember who said it, but I understood that the University as an institution was no longer being requested to boycott a product," Wyatt said.

Daniel Cohn '79, a member of the committee, said yesterday that Wyatt's assumption that boycotting is not an alternative is "absolutely not a conclusion of the committee."

Dean Rosovsky. Epps, Wyatt and other administrators formed the committee in December.

"The idea evolved out of a discussion in which we were trying to figure out what the issues surrounding boycott are," DeanFox said yesterday.

Two Fold

Fox said that the committee's purpose is two fold: first to decide what the issues around boycott and the University are, and then to suggest University action on the group's conclusions.

Calkins said he thought a boycott should be an individual decision.

"You can't make life so complicated that you create student-faculty committees to decide right from wrong." Calkins said.

Despite the different ideas as to what the committee will conclude, administrators agree that the group's recommendations will be carefully considered.

"You don't ask people to invest that much time and energy and then not seriously pay attention to what they conclude," Fox said.

Wyatt said he also plans to pay close attention to the committee's recommendations.

Disturbed

Epps said, however, that he was very disturbed by the misunderstanding concerning the committee's conclusions.

"We've been working away under the assumption that our work would have some influence," Epps said, adding that the committee's resolutions are still in the very early stage.

"It makes me wonder if what we're doing is really worthwhile," Epps said.