Cavalier Bus Contract Is Just Good Business

I think you were overly critical of HUPD's Lieutenant Lawrence Murphy in your editorial "VIP Treatment" (October 6, 1993). Harvard--along with the rest of the world--is full of networks, favors, connections and other special arrangements. In some cases they hurt the University (or the corporation), but this is not one of them.

While Murphy and Cavalier Coach certainly benefit from their arrangement, Harvard may also receive benefits in the form of familiar arrangements and smoother service. There is no proof that switching bus companies would have resulted in late buses or annoyed alumni (and possibly reduced donations). But, as your editorial admits, neither is there proof that Harvard paid extra or received inferior service because Murphy failed to put the contract up to bid each year.

Competition and bidding are nice, but any organization or executive must decide when the time and effort needed to solicit and compare bids costs more than the potential savings from competition. Also, an organization runs on people. Without small favors, friendly arrangements, and personal discretion, it becomes bogged down in paperwork, standards, rules and committees.

When President Clinton picked three women in a row for Attorney General, he didn't pick the smartest and most experienced people available. Instead he picked people who shared his views, who were female, and who (he hoped) didn't have any skeletons in the closet. Clinton also nominated former classmates, friends, and fellow Rhodes Scholars. It wasn't "fair" to all the other possible candidates, but that doesn't necessarily mean it was bad for America.

Even at Harvard, comedy writers hire Lampoon members, former lacrosse players hire current ones, and in general, alums hire other alums. Harvard has argued that information sharing among the Northeast Overlap Group is neither illegal nor bad, though it obviously eliminates the competitive "bidding" for students. For years, The Crimson has relied on Patrick R. Sorrento to help put it together, but I doubt his job was ever out to bid. A replacement who worked just as hard for less might seem cost-effective, but actually cost the paper more in lost time because he or she lacked Pat's skills, knowledge, familiarity with The Crimson, and famous genial personality (not to mention fragrant stogies).

Such examples are everywhere. Sometimes they're harmful, sometimes they're not, and unless it's a government contract, people rarely care.

I drove a handicapped van for the 1992 reunions, and saw Murphy coordinating transportation at a Symphony Hall event. I have a few personal differences with him on other matters, but as far as I can tell, he did a fine job ensuring that everyone made it to there and back in a safe and timely matter, which is his job.

Murphy's job is not getting the cheapest buses. If he had chosen the lowest bidder last June, and a driver's negligence caused a serious accident, or if he had ignored campus safety concerns in order to solicit bids, I don't think you would be writing about competition and free markets. Instead, you would be castigating Harvard and Murphy for valuing a few dollars above alumni and student safety.

If Murphy hid ties with the Cavalier Coach Corporation, or worse, blatantly lied about his ties to the company, then he has made a serious error of judgment and should be reprimanded. But since Cavalier seems to have provided good service at a fair price, I don't see any other problems with the arrangement. John F. "Case" Kim '92-'95