Despite having failed twice in the past six years, labor leaders have launched another drive to unionize workers at the Medical Area which yesterday received support from a gathering of more than 200 employees.

Charging that Harvard has consistently displayed a disregard for its workers by ignoring demands for increased benefits and salaries, union representatives outlined plans for an employee referendum on the issue that they hope to hold this fall.

District 65 of the United Auto Workers (UAW), which is leading the unionization effort, last month filed a petition for the referendum with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which must approve any such request.

Two previous attempts to unionize the 850 administrative, clerical and technical workers at Harvard's Boston medical campus--in 1977 and 1981--failed to win the support of a majority of workers voting.

In both cases, union organizers charged that Harvard had unfairly influenced the election results, although subsequent reviews by the NLRB failed to produce evidence to support the union claims.

Despite these rulings, however, District 65 leaders continue to criticize Harvard for what they label as anti-union tactics. They used yesterday's meeting at the Med School's Vanderbilt dormitory as much to reiterate their claims as to call attention to their latest unionization effort.

Harvard wages a "sophisticated, antiunion" battle with "secret promises, rumors, and whisper campaigns," union organizer Kristine Rondeau told the assembled workers.

Rep. Barney Frank '62 (D-Mass.), a vocal union supporter, said that he held "real respect for Harvard," but was disappointed with what organizers termed a disregard for workers' needs.

"I am distressed that my alma mater, for reasons inexplicable to me, has decided to be anti-union. A work force that has respect and dignity enhances the institution," Frank told the workers.

In an interview, union organizer Marie C. Manna pointed to annual salaries of $12,000 to $13,000 for experienced administrative workers and research assistants as evidence of Harvard's disregard for workers' needs.

University Vice President and General Counsel Daniel Steiner '54, who has consistently denied Harvard efforts to thwart the union drive, yesterday declined to discuss the specific charges made at the Med School meeting.

But he added, "I do feel the union should be able to engage in whatever activities they like."

District 65 officials yesterday recounted their unsuccessful efforts to overturn the last election, held in April 1981, which they claimed was unfairly influenced by statements made to workers by supervisory personnel. After a long waiting period, the NLRB earlier this year upheld the results of the election, which the union lost 390-328.

The NLRB is expected to rule in the coming months the merits of the current petition for a referendum, following a series of hearings to determine whether the Medical Area workers constitute a logical, organized group.

Harvard has contended that all Harvard workers--both at the Boston Medical Area and the Cambridge campus--should be considered as a single unit. In allowing the two prior elections, however, the NLRB has sided with District 65, concluding that the Medical Area--including the Dental School, Med School, and School of Public Health--is an appropriate unit because of its geographical separation from the remainder of the University.

Union leaders have said that they would consider a strong attempt to organize workers at the main campus if they succeed at the Medical Area.