Combine ever-more complicated employment laws with ever-more litigious employees, and you've got the likelihood that an employer of just about any size will be dragged into civil court over one action or another. And it's just as likely that the company's "designated witness" in a deposition, arbitration procedure, or trial will be someone from human resources.

At the Society for Human Resource Management's annual convention in Philadelphia, HR professionals got some tips on how to handle themselves on the witness stand from two lawyers who handle such cases: Allan Weitzman and Paul Salvatore, both of the national law firm Proskauer Rose.

They broke the session down into two basic steps: memorializing the decision-making process at the center of the litigation, and becoming an effective witness.

Show us the documents

Salvatore noted that most states have 300-day statutes of limitation for filing lawsuits over employment actions. Assuming an employee waits until the last minute to act - which is often the case - the HR department will have made many other decisions in the meantime, leaving recollections foggy. "Who remember what you did 300 days ago unless you were on vacation?" Salvatore asked.

It's important, therefore, to document all decisions - no matter how innocuous they may seem at the time. "Create a summary, something you can refresh your memory with," Salvatore said. This should include: the basic facts of the decision, references to the company's relevant employment procedural, the ultimate decision, the reason or reasons for the decision, and a list of the parties involved in the decision-making process.

Testifying strictly from memory doesn't impress, according to Salvatore. "I'm sorry to say, juries are not going to believe a lot of the things that come out of your mouth," he said. But documentation is another matter: "Let me tell you, juries love documents."

It's also important, according to Salvatore, to act as though as any investigation of an employee for possible wrongdoing - such as checking out a claim of sexual harassment - will be scrutinized in litigation later on. So the HR interviewer should not only make sure to hear from everyone involved in the matter, but bring another management-level employee to the meeting to act as a witness who can corroborate whatever transpires. (Like the interviewer, the witness should take copious notes.)

Another good idea: Prepare a witness statement afterward, giving a full and accurate account of what was said in the meeting, and ask the employee to sign it.

Taking all those notes won't mean a thing if they're not properly stored and maintained. Salvatore recommended doing the following: After any personnel decision, gather all files on the employee involved so that they are readily accessible. Also, collect the laws and policies that apply to that case and that time period. And be sure to keep everything for the duration of the applicable statute of limitations. This requires checking federal and state laws.

"The best practice is not to destroy any documents," Salvatore said. "I guess I don't have to say that after Enron."

Some documents may have been prepared at the request of the company's legal counsel. In that case, they should be clearly labeled accordingly, thereby bringing them under the lawyer-client privacy privilege. This means that the organization may be able to keep them from the employee's lawyer.

In one important respect, documents should carry no markings - as in stray marks or comments in the margins that might catch the opposing lawyer's eye. For instance, Salvatore said, a big no-no would be jotting down the ages of a list of people subject to layoffs.

Testifying, and the 10 Commandments

Weitzman had these pointers for that Big Day on the witness stand:

1. Be honest - no matter how much it hurts. "Credibility is incredibly important," Weitzman said. "One lie brings all your testimony into question." A corollary of this: Never begin a sentence with, "To tell you the truth..." "It implies you're not telling the truth the rest of the time," Weitzman said.

2. Pay attention to your demeanor. That means showing respect to everyone else in the courtroom and dressing conservatively. It also means watching your body language. ("Don't bang your fist on the witness stand," Weitzman warns.)

3. Listen carefully to the question. Don't blurt out something before the lawyer can finish his question - it may not be the question you think you're getting. Same goes for giving nonverbal responses in mid-question.

4. Pause before responding. It's OK to think through your answer before giving it. Weitzman recalled a saying of his former partner's: "Put brain in gear before engaging mouth." A pause also gives your lawyer time to raise an objection, he added.

5. Request that the question be clarified. There are no points off for doing this either - and you can ask for as much clarification as you want, Weitzman said.

6. Answer only the question asked - don't volunteer. Weitzman grew vexed at the thought of how many times he's seen this commandment violated, with the result of the witness opening a new line of invariably damaging testimony for the opposing lawyer. "It's not your job to be helpful to the other side," he said. Most aggravating of all to a lawyer, he said, is a client who answers yes-or-no questions with something other than "yes" or "no." For instance, the question, "Do you know what time it is?" should not elicit an answer like, "11:23." It's either "yes" or "no."

7. Direct answers to the judge or the jury.

8. Admit lack of knowledge. "If you don't know," Weitzman stressed, "say so." That includes avoiding hedging phrases like, "I suppose," "I think," and "I assume."

9. If the answer is, "No," respond "No." Avoid phrases like, "I don't think so." Again, equivocating can open a can of worms.

10. Get plenty of sleep and eat a large breakfast!