Several department administrators have expressed frustration with the new office supplies contract recently implemented by the College, saying that staff were not consulted about the contractual change and that new copy machines are inferior to the previous models.
The contract is one of several cost-saving initiatives taken by the College to meet budget goals. It requires faculty and staff to order supplies from a single source, according to a letter from Procurement Services Director Tammy Moffatt addressed to Service Employees International Union local 560 President Earl Sweet describing the changes.
Moffatt's letter stated that College administrators worked with staff members and Deloitte & Touche consultants to make the decision, which was implemented on Sept. 29. By entering into a contract with a "preferred partner" and limiting the number of choices Dartmouth employees have for ordering items like pens and paper, the College will save $400,000, according to the letter, though the letter did not specify the period in which the savings would occur.
In addition to the switch to W.B. Mason as the sole provider of office supplies to the College, copy machines throughout campus were replaced. Ricoh machines have replaced those produced by Conway, Dartmouth's previous copy machine contractor.
Faculty and staff received a general notice announcing the change in late summer, according to Gail Vernazza, administrator of the history department. Vernazza took issue with Moffatt's letter, saying that department administrators had no input in the decision to change to W.B. Mason and were only notified that the copy machines would be changed and the date that the new machines would be delivered.
Another department administrator, who asked to speak not for attribution, concurred with Vernazza's statements.
"A lot of faculty feel that this has not been discussed with them," the administrator said. "Changes were made from the top down, and administrators felt that it was demeaning that they were not included in the decision."
Vernazza said that the office supplier change means that faculty and staff now only have access to a limited range of supplies, since they can only order products offered by W.B. Mason and will no longer be reimbursed for items bought from other stores.
Two other department administrators, who also spoke not for attribution, said they feel that the copy machine switch has created significant problems, adding that the transition has not been smooth.
"The way [the switch] was handled was terrible," one administrator said. "We were told very suddenly that our old machines would be taken away and replaced. We were told that the new ones would be like-for-like, that the company would work with us for scheduling and delivery times and that we would get IT support and training, and none of that has been true."
Vernazza said faculty and staff were told that their machines would be replaced with nearly identical models, but some of the new models do not have faxing capabilities.
Department administrators said the new machines are much slower, less efficient and lack many of the features that were available on the Conway machines, such hole punching and flash drive support.
Some of the new machines were not initially able to connect to computers and print from them directly, according to the second department administrator.
Although the College Procurement Office stated in its letter that the changes will save the College $400,000, administrators said those savings will not be reflected in departmental budgets.
Many of the machines that have arrived on campus so far were installed during the first two weeks of Fall term, according to one of the department administrators who spoke anonymously. The timing of the installation during the busiest weeks of the term was a poor choice, the administrator said.
"These are cost-saving efforts that end up costing a lot more time and productivity," one administrator said. "You save a penny, but you lose a dollar."
The new machines have broken frequently since the installation, creating a strain on multiple departments, administrators said. Four or five departments often share a single machine for class material, transcripts and other paperwork.
"They're used by everyone, everyday, and it's a mess when they don't work," the second anonymous department administrator said.
Representatives from Procurement Services declined to comment when contacted by The Dartmouth.
Currently, academic departments are charged for the monthly rental of the machine and are billed quarterly for the amount printed, in addition to a base rental fee for each machine, Vernazza said.
