Skip to main content

H. Andrew Matzkin

Member

[email protected]

+1.617.348.1683

Share:

Drew is a seasoned employment litigator whose practice includes counseling clients on the full range of federal and state labor and employment issues. He represents companies in many sectors, including life sciences, technology, industrial, and professional services — in federal and state courts and before arbitrators and administrative agencies. He skillfully navigates issues involving noncompetition agreements, discrimination and harassment, workplace health and safety, employment contracts and handbooks, leaves of absence, and collective bargaining. As part of his practice, Drew also regularly conducts OSHA site inspections and compliance audits, and handles OSHA complaints, investigations, and administrative law actions.

Drew's work primarily involves litigation and counseling on federal and state labor and employment issues, including discrimination, sexual harassment, leaves of absence, workplace health and safety, employment handbooks and contracts, and collective bargaining agreements. He has also defended employers against wage and hour class actions brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and state wage and hour laws.

Drew handles employment litigation before federal and state courts, arbitrators, and administrative agencies, including state fair employment and human rights agencies, unemployment assistance agencies, and industrial accidents agencies. Representative cases involve claims pertaining to discrimination, harassment, retaliation, wrongful discharge, wage and hour laws, trade secret protection, enforcement of noncompetition and nonsolicitation agreements, and contract disputes.

He also counsels clients on a wide variety of employment issues, such as leaves of absence, independent contractor and employee classification, exempt and nonexempt worker classification, reasonable accommodation for handicapped employees, disciplining and terminating employees, investigating claims of harassment, and protecting trade secrets and confidential information. Drew regularly reviews employment handbooks and personnel policies, and drafts employment agreements and noncompetition agreements.

In addition, Drew regularly counsels employers regarding all aspects of environmental health and safety. Drew has conducted numerous OSHA site inspections and compliance audits, has handled numerous OSHA investigations, complaints and administrative law actions, and regularly counsels clients on OSHA issues ranging from routine compliance workplace injuries to fatalities.

Before joining the firm, Drew was a Judicial Law Clerk at the Norfolk County Probate and Family Court. During law school, he also handled family law and disability law cases as a student attorney at both the Boston College Legal Assistance Bureau and Shelter Legal Services. His experience included arguing motions for temporary restraining orders, negotiating divorce, custody, and visitation agreements, and drafting and arguing appeals for social security disability benefits.

As an undergraduate at Bates College, he was a member of both the men's rugby and lacrosse teams.

Education

  • Boston College (JD, cum laude)
  • Bates College (BA, cum laude)

Experience

  • National Food Wholesaler v. Local Food Wholesaler and Former Employees of National Wholesaler: Successfully opposed a motion for preliminary injunction filed by a national food wholesaler against former employees and client/new employer.
  • Former Employee v. Regional Dental Corporation: Successfully moved to dismiss statutory wage/hour claims and common law employment claims against defendant employer and individual owner, based on arbitration provision in employment agreement.
  • Employees v. City Utilities Agency: Represented city utilities agency in defending a complaint by current employees alleging harassment, discrimination and retaliation in violation of applicable state law.
  • Former Employee v. International Travel Company: Represented international travel company in defending complaint filed by former employee alleging sexual harassment, discrimination and harassment in violation of state and federal law.
  • Former Executives v. International Security Company: Represented international security company in defending complaint filed by executives alleging sexual harassment and retaliation in violation of state and federal law.
  • Former Employees v. International Security Company: Represented international security company in defending wage/hour class action based on alleged failure to pay Sunday Premium Pay under applicable state law.
  • Current Employees v. International Translation Company: Represented international translation services company in defending wage/hour class action based on alleged failure to properly classify employees as exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act and applicable state law.
  • Former Employee v. International Life Sciences Company: Represented international life sciences company in defending claims by former employee of unlawful termination under federal Family and Medical Leave Act and California state analog.
  • National Staffing Company v. Former Executive: Represented national staffing company in breach of contract action against former executive, successfully moving for preliminary injunction to prohibit executive from working at competitor and soliciting client accounts, ultimately leading to favorable case settlement.
  • Former Employees v. National Department Store Retailer: Successfully moved to dismiss nationwide FLSA collective action against nationwide department store retailer based on arbitration agreement signed by employees as condition of employment, pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court “Epic Systems” decision.
  • Successfully obtained a preliminary injunction against a former employee of a mortgage loan company who resigned from client employer while in possession of confidential information and trade secrets.
  • Former Executive v. Wholly Owned Subsidiary of National Bank: Represented a bank in a jury trial involving a former executive’s claim for “phantom stock” in the bank's subsidiary.
  • National Restaurant Chain v. Massachusetts Division of Unemployment Assistance: Following a full evidentiary appeal hearing and oral argument, court granted extraordinary relief of overturning agency determination of liability against employer, and remanding matter to agency for further review pursuant to court order).
  • Former Employer v. National Technology Management Company: Following a full evidentiary hearing, successfully opposed and dismissed case against former employee and new employer for breach of noncompetition covenant, based on emerging “material change” doctrine under Massachusetts law.
  • Regional Staffing Company v. Massachusetts Division of Unemployment Assistance: Following a full evidentiary appeal hearing, overturned the Division determination of over $200,000 liability for employer contribution under the Massachusetts Fair Share Contribution Law.
  • National Transportation Company v. Employee: Following hearing, successfully obtained court order ruling that claims under the Massachusetts Wiretap Act are not preempted by the National Labor Relations Act, and prohibiting employee from using or disseminating recording of supervisor comments in violation of the Massachusetts Wiretap Act.
  • Former Employee v. National Trucking Company: Successfully moved to dismiss a former employee’s claim for race and sex harassment and discrimination against an interstate trucking company.
  • Former Executive v. Nationwide Travel Company: Successfully moved to dismiss a former executive’s claim for violation of M.G.L. c. 93A against a national travel company, ultimately resulting in a favorable case settlement.
  • Former Employee v. International Mobile Network Software Provider: Following a full evidentiary hearing, successfully moved to dismiss a former employee’s claim of national origin harassment and discrimination against a corporate defendant and two individual officers.
  • National Office Services Company v. Massachusetts Division of Unemployment Assistance: Following a full evidentiary appeal hearing, overturned the Division determination of over $800,000 liability for employer contribution under Massachusetts Fair Share Contribution Law
  • Former Employee v. Local Food Company: Represented a local food company in a jury trial involving allegations of harassment and discrimination; successfully dismissed 5 of 6 original counts against the company.
  • Former Employee v. International Inbound Marketing and Sales Company: Represented international inbound marketing and sales company in defending complaint filed by former employee alleging retaliation and discrimination based on disability in violation of state and federal law.

Recognition & Awards

  • Included on the Massachusetts Super Lawyers: Employment & Labor List (2016 - 2019)
  • Benchmark Litigation: Labor & Employment Star (2019)
  • Best Lawyers in America: Litigation - Labor and Employment (2019-2020)
  • Included on the Massachusetts Super Lawyers: Rising Star – Employment & Labor List (2009 – 2013)

Viewpoints

Bankruptcy & Restructuring Viewpoints Thumbnail

Top 10 Questions Human Resources May Have When Their Company is Filing for Chapter 11 Protection

June 2, 2020 | Blog | By Andrew Matzkin, Kaitlin R. Walsh, William Kannel

Businesses in a wide range of industries may now be forced to consider bankruptcy given the unprecedented economic challenges caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This advisory is designed to provide a high-level view of issues to be considered by human resources when considering filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
Read more
Employment, Labor, and Benefits Viewpoints Thumbnail

Massachusetts Releases Reopening Plan & Business Requirements

June 1, 2020 | Blog | By Morgan G. Tanafon, Andrew Matzkin

Massachusetts has unveiled its plan to reopen from the shutdown enacted in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. This plan was formalized on May 18th in Governor Baker’s “Order Implementing a Phased Reopening of Workplaces and Imposing Workplace Safety Measures to Address COVID-19” (the “Order”). The reopening plan is divided into four flexible phases, each lasting a minimum of three weeks, although a resurgence of the virus could necessitate a return to an earlier phase of the plan and extend the reopening timeline.

Many Massachusetts businesses now have concrete guidance on the measures they are required to complete before reopening their workplaces, and a tentative timeline on when they might be able to reopen. Businesses must meet the required Mandatory Safety Standards for Workplaces (the “Safety Standards”) in order to reopen. Currently, only the Phase 1 standards have been released, with the release of other phase standards to follow as the plan progresses. In addition, as the plan progresses, the requirements for businesses in earlier phases will likely be updated as the public health emergency develops. Businesses should track updates from Massachusetts authorities going forward, including guidance from local jurisdictions.
Read more
Employment, Labor, and Benefits Viewpoints Thumbnail

Part Nine of the COVID-19 Roadmap Series: Ensuring Compliance – Leave Management

May 18, 2020 | Blog | By Corbin Carter, Natalie Young, Michael Arnold, Andrew Matzkin

As management and human resources professionals are well aware, COVID-19 has drastically and rapidly impacted the workplace. Among other things, employees require more flexibility, employers are increasingly reliant upon remote work arrangements, and legislative and administrative responses to the pandemic from various levels of government have created new requirements for businesses, including new leave entitlements for employees. In Part Nine of our Roadmap Series, we explore key considerations surrounding leave management and compliance as employees and businesses navigate this new terrain.
Read more

Massachusetts Earned Sick Time Law Takes Effect July 1st

June 24, 2015 | Advisory | By Andrew Matzkin

The Massachusetts Earned Sick Time Law, which requires nearly all Massachusetts employers to provide earned sick time to employees, goes into effect on July 1, 2015. Unless they qualify for the limited safe harbor provision (discussed below), employers must be in compliance with the law and allow employees to begin accruing time on July 1.
Read more
My colleague Drew Matzkin is quoted in this Society for Human Resource Management piece in which he comments on the importance of employers keeping an employee’s performance issues separate from the individual’s use of FMLA-leave. The article focuses on the rising rate of FMLA abuse and specific tactics employers can take to contain it.
Read more

NLRB: Broad Confidentiality Clauses May Be Per Se Unlawful

August 12, 2011 | Blog | By Martha Zackin

Many employers have employees sign confidentiality agreements aimed at prohibiting disclosure of confidential business information to third parties, and it has been widely assumed that such clauses were lawful.
Read more

Events

Speaker
Apr
15
2020
Speaker
Speaker
Nov
7
2018

Boston Employment Law Summit

One Financial Center, Boston, MA

Moderator
May
13
2015

Massachusetts Employment Law Summit

Mintz Levin

Boston, MA

Speaker
Apr
14
2015

Immigration for the HR Professional

Hyatt House 2 Van de Graaff Drive Burlington, MA