Bolingbrook-based Quantum Foods faces a national-origin discrimination lawsuit from the EEOC, based on a Hispanic worker’s claim that he was terminated because of his national origin. The EEOC sought hiring records for the facility for the past four years.

Have you faced a situation where you weren’t sure whether an employee had been unfairly treated by a supervisor? When doubts arise, it’s sometimes best to offer the employee a fresh start. But if the old problems resurface and you end up terminating the employee, chances are a court will view the employee as the problem.

While Congress ponders the Employee Misclassification Prevention Act, several states are studying ways to target employers that misclassify their employees as independent contractors. Illinois is part of a joint task force studying the misclassification problem.

Let’s say a supervisor acts too hastily in firing an employee who has turnaround potential. Or perhaps you learn the employee has a plausible discrimination claim, and you’d rather address the issue right away than risk litigation. If you offer to reinstate the employee right away and she refuses to return, chances are a court won’t conclude you unfairly terminated her in the first place.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned a jury’s $300,000 retaliation award, reasoning that the complaint that was the basis for the retaliation claim wasn’t based on a good-faith belief that discrimination had occurred.

The idea behind alternative dispute resolution is that cases will take less time and cost less money to litigate. But that may not always be true. Often, employees who have signed arbitration agreements and promised to use an alternative dispute-resolution process end up suing in federal court to try to get the agreement thrown out. Courts often oblige.

When someone gets fired because a co-worker complained about discrimination, other employees may get upset. Frequently, they don’t know the back story and may ostracize the employee who originally complained about discrimination. That’s especially true if the terminated employee was well liked. However, courts generally won’t consider it an adverse employment action if workers give the complaining employee the “silent treatment.”

Employers sometimes think that if they have a broad workplace rule in place, they have to punish everyone who breaks that rule exactly the same way. That’s not necessarily true. The key is to make sure you can document why one employee deserved a more severe punishment than another. Two cases illustrate how to go about individualizing punishment:

Disabled employees may be entitled to transfer to an open position as a reasonable accommodation. But if that open position is subject to a collective-bargaining agreement, and another employee should receive the job under that agreement, the transfer would be unreasonable.

Employers are naturally concerned about employees who hurt themselves at work and collect workers’ compensation benefits. One of those concerns is that an early return, before the employee is ready, may cause a reinjury. That attitude, however, can come back to hurt if you insist on a 100%-healed requirement before the employee can resume work.

Employees who lose their jobs often think the reason just has to be discrimination. Their first stop after receiving their pink slips: a lawyer’s office. If the resulting lawsuit is meritless, push hard for dismissal.

If you offer short-term disability (STD) benefits for employees who can’t work because of illness, you probably insist on medical documentation. If the employee doesn’t provide that information within the reasonable timeline your STD plan requires, you can count the absence against the employee and terminate her.

The Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA) makes it an unfair employment practice to terminate an employee based on marital status. The Court of Appeals of Minnesota has now clarified that the law covers more than the state of being married; it also bans discrimination based on who one’s spouse is.

Here’s one thing you don’t have to worry about—the race of the manager terminating another employee. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals had rejected the idea that just because the decision-maker happens to be of a different race than the employee being disciplined, there may be racism involved.

Don’t expect to get a case tossed out just because the complaint is vague. The fact is, courts are willing to let an employee continue a quest for a big jury award as long as the complaint puts the employer on notice about the essentials, if not the specifics, of the case.

Consider this scenario: An employee lodges a complaint that her sex or race kept her from being promoted. Shortly after, you offer her an opportunity for advancement. She then turns around and sues, alleging that the offer was a sham. Fortunately, courts are rejecting such arguments.

While Congress ponders the Employee Misclassification Prevention Act, several states are studying ways to target employers that misclassify their employees as independent contractors. Minnesota is part of a joint task force studying the misclassification problem.

Q. We are considering hiring an employee away from one of our competitors. Should we ask whether she is subject to a noncompete agreement, or is it better for us to move forward not knowing the answer?

Q. We strongly suspect that one of our employees has been taking money out of the cash register. Whenever he is responsible for the register, there are a lot more shortages than when others work the register. Even though we can’t prove he is taking money, can we terminate his employment?

Cincinnati-based Everdry Marketing and Management, a waterproofing firm, has paid more than $500,000 to satisfy a judgment won by a group of 13 women who filed sexual harassment claims against the company.

Michael T. Murray, owner of Three R Construction Co. in Cincinnati, has pleaded guilty to bribery and failing to report that a U.S. Postal Service official was demanding payment in return for awarding construction contracts. Murray faces up to three years in prison plus $250,000 in fines.

Courts understand reductions in force and recognize that companies sometimes have to make tough decisions. When an employer can show it had good reasons for cutting employees through a RIF, affected employees will have to come up with solid discrimination evidence early in the litigation game.

Q. We currently have a policy against the hiring of anyone with a felony conviction. Can you shed some light on whether this policy is legal?

In age discrimination cases, employees only have to show they were replaced by someone younger, or otherwise discharged because of age. You will have a much easier time showing that you had a legitimate reason unrelated to age for terminating the employee if you can cite specific business reasons to back up each part of your decision-making process.

Employees who complain about discrimination are protected from retaliation—and even a small financial penalty against an employee may be enough to trigger a lawsuit. Remember: The test for retaliation is whether a hypothetical reasonable employee would be dissuaded from complaining in the first place if he or she knew the consequences.