In a move reserved for only 10 percent of its cases, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) will conduct a review this spring of charges that Harvard tampered with a union election last year.

If the NLRB rules against Harvard, a new unionization election will have to be held for University employees in the Medical Area.

Workers rejected a unionization offer from a local United Auto Workers (UAW) chapter in a close vote last April. The controversial election was marked by charges that Harvard threatened workers' jobs shortly before they cast their ballots.

Immediately after the election District 65 of the UAW field charges with the NLRB that Harvard unfairly influenced workers.

In an initial investigation, an NLRB officer ruled that Harvard had interfered with the election, but the board's regional director overturned that decision, sending the case to the national agency in Washington.

Harvard Will Sue Harvard officials said yesterday that even if the NLRB rules in favor of District 65, the University would try to block another election by suing the labor agency in federal court.

Although the NLRB hears only one out of 10 cases stemming from local disputes, Harvard's Assistant General Counsel Edward W. Powers said that the federal review was not a victory for union leaders.

Each request for an NLRB review is considered by a three-members panel of agency executives, and one group voted 2-1 on Friday to have all five board members evaluate the election later this spring, said John C. Truesdale, executive secretary for the NLRB.

Steiner Expects Delay

Harvard officially has until Tuesday to file briefs outlining its position on the case, but Daniel Steiner'54, the University's general counsel, said that Harvard will probably request an extension to fully prepare its case.

Steiner said the University would argue that" a valid election was held [and] that Harvard's policy, which was adhered to was one of non-interference."

Union Charges

Union officials have charged that during the last few months of the organizing drive. Harvard mounted "one of the most sophisticated and intense anti-union campaigns, just to scare people"

The union specifically charged that two Harvard supervisors held anti-union meetings on the job. One professor "left employees [at such a meeting] with the impression that the University would not fund pay raises won by the union: that is illegal," Kristine Rondeau a District 65 organizer said yesterday.

Another supervisor, the union charged, told his workers that there would be layoffs. "They threatened people with their job security, which is funny because they don't have any anyway," Rondeau said.