Sometimes, you don’t know how lousy an employee was until he or she is gone. That may be when you find out about missing work, or even missing money. Or you may discover that the employee was essentially dishonest. If that’s the fact, promptly document what you discovered—just in case there is a later lawsuit.

California lawmakers—and courts—don’t like noncompete agreements because they limit employee mobility and career growth. Most employers understand that they can’t enforce such agreements if an employee leaves. But what about an informal “gentlemen’s agreement” between competitors to refrain from hiring employees who signed agreements?

In Texas, employees can be required to arbitrate employment disputes instead of going to court. When they start work, employees typically sign a document indicating they received and read the agreement. But employers often change arbitration agreements. Every time they do so, employees must receive a new copy—and sign an acknowledgment that they got it.

Employers and their lawyers often favor mandatory arbitration of employment claims for two reasons: It’s a cost-effective alternative to court, and it’s an insurance policy against runaway jury verdicts. Arbitration, however, can often prove just as costly as court. Thus, while many employers continue to favor arbitration to limit their potential exposure in front of a jury, others have begun to consider alternatives.

There’s good news for New Jersey employers that use arbitration agreements to keep workplace disagreements out of court. Courts often find arbitration agreements valid, even if the employee who signed it was in a take-it-or-leave-it position. What’s more, courts won’t toss out an agreement just because a small section may be invalid. Instead, they’ll strike the invalid parts and leave the rest intact.