18/09/2026
After many years in labor and employment practice, one lesson has stayed with me: Many workplace disputes begin long before anyone thinks there is a dispute.
At the beginning, everything usually seems simple. Someone needs to be hired. A position needs to be filled. A manager needs help. A new employee is brought in.
People agree on what needs to be done, and everyone gets back to work. Nobody is thinking about a future labor complaint. Nobody is thinking about the NLRC. Nobody is thinking about what a court might say years later.
And yet, sometimes, the decisions made during those early days become the very things everyone looks at when the relationship eventually breaks down. That is why I have always believed that good labor-law practice is not just about defending an employer when a complaint has already been filed. It is also about helping employers make better decisions before there is a dispute to defend.
It starts with understanding the relationship.
One of the most important questions an employer can ask is deceptively simple: What exactly is the working relationship? Is this person an employee? Is the engagement genuinely project-based? Is the position probationary? Is the arrangement temporary for a legitimate reason? Is the person being engaged an independent contractor – and does the actual arrangement support that characterization?
These are not merely labels to be placed in a contract. What matters is how the relationship actually operates. Because when a dispute arises, a document may be important, but it does not always tell the entire story. The actual work arrangement matters. The degree of control matters. The expectations imposed on the worker matter. The way the parties conducted themselves over time matters.
That is why I often tell employers: Do not wait for a dispute before asking what relationship you actually have with the person working for you. Understand it at the beginning. Then communicate expectations clearly.
Many workplace problems are not caused by bad intentions. They begin with assumptions. The employer assumes the employee understands the standard. The manager assumes the instruction was clear. The employee assumes something was allowed because nobody said otherwise. A deadline is understood differently by two people. A performance expectation exists in the manager's mind but was never properly communicated to the employee.
Months later, someone says: "But I thought that was understood." That sentence has been at the beginning of more workplace problems than many employers realize.
Good management does not leave important expectations to guesswork. If something matters, communicate it. If a standard matters, explain it. If a responsibility matters, make sure the employee understands it.
And when appropriate, document it. Documentation is not necessarily about preparing for litigation. Sometimes, it is simply a way of making sure everyone remembers the same conversation.
Then comes the difficult part: management decisions.
Eventually, every employer has to make difficult decisions. An employee may not be meeting expectations. There may be repeated violations of company rules. A position may need to be changed or discontinued. A business may need to reorganize. A working relationship may no longer be sustainable.
These decisions are part of running an organization. But before acting, it helps to slow down. What are the facts? What actually happened? What does the contract say? What does the law require? What policies apply? Has the employee been treated consistently with others in comparable circumstances?
And perhaps most importantly: If someone asked us six months from now why we made this decision, could we explain it clearly? That last question is worth asking more often. Because sometimes an employer knows why a decision was made – but the reason was never documented.
Sometimes the reason was valid, but the process was poorly handled. Sometimes the facts were never properly established. Sometimes management acted too quickly. And sometimes a decision that seemed harmless at the time becomes very difficult to explain later. Good documentation tells the story.
I have seen employers become concerned about documentation only after a dispute has already started. By then, everyone is trying to reconstruct what happened. Who said what? When was the employee informed? What was the instruction? Was there a warning? Was the employee given an opportunity to respond? What records exist? Who was present? What was management actually trying to accomplish? That is a difficult position to be in.
Good documentation is not about creating paperwork for paperwork's sake. It is about preserving the story while the facts are still fresh. A clear email. A properly documented meeting. A written explanation. A performance discussion. A record of an instruction. A contemporaneous note of an important conversation.
These things may seem ordinary when they are created. They can become extremely important when memories differ later.
And this is where I think employers sometimes misunderstand the role of labor law. Labor law should not enter the conversation only when somebody says: "We received a complaint." By then, the lawyer is often being asked to work with decisions that have already been made. The better time to ask questions is earlier. Before the employee is hired. Before a working arrangement is structured. Before a policy is implemented. Before discipline is imposed. Before a resignation is accepted. Before a position is changed. Before a difficult employment decision is made.
That does not mean every management decision needs a lawyer sitting beside the manager. It simply means that important decisions deserve thoughtful questions. And sometimes, a short conversation with counsel before acting can prevent a much longer conversation after a dispute has begun.
After all these years, this is still one of the lessons I come back to.
The strongest employers are not necessarily those who never encounter workplace problems. Workplaces are made up of people. People misunderstand each other. People make mistakes. Managers sometimes make poor decisions. Employees sometimes fall short. Businesses change. Relationships sometimes end. That is part of organizational life.
What makes a difference is how those situations are handled. Was the relationship properly understood from the beginning? Were expectations clear? Were important decisions based on facts? Was the employee treated fairly? Was the proper process followed? And can management explain, in a straightforward way, why it did what it did?
Those questions are not merely defensive questions. They are good management questions. And that is perhaps the bigger lesson. Good labor-law practice is not about being afraid of every employment decision. It is about making those decisions thoughtfully.
Because the best legal advice is often the advice you receive before you need a lawyer to defend the decision. So, before you decide, understand the relationship. Before you set expectations, communicate them. Before you act, know the facts. And before you make an important employment decision, ask the questions that may matter later.
You may never have to defend that decision in a labor case. But if the day comes when you do, you will be glad that you took the time to get it right from the start. Before you decide, understand the relationship. Before you act, know the law.
--------
If this resonates with you, follow AcordaLaw for more practical conversations about leadership, people, and the workplace.
Disclaimer: This post is for general information only and is not legal advice.
