A few things to check (some mentioned in earlier posts but I'll try to consolidate):
1. Scope of any non-compete or non-solicitation clauses. Ideally, there will be no non-compete clause in a layoff. Non-solicitation clauses are more reasonable. They could try striking out the non-compete (or narrowing its duration or geographic scope). Google non-compete agreements in an employment setting for the friend's particular state. There have been some very recent changes in the law in some states that either make the clauses illegal altogether or significantly narrow their scope. Company agreements haven't necessarily caught up with the law.
2. In a larger layoff at (as opposed to a very targeted set of dismissals) at a company with proper HR and legal departments, there's usually very little scope to negotiate. Often, the company will have established standard bands for the financial terms in the layoff, e.g. employees within a certain salary range (or seniority range), sometimes combined with length of time at the company, will get the same package (e.g. 10 weeks, 20 weeks, 30 weeks), combined with continuation of benefits and similar treatment of stock options, stock appreciation rights etc (e.g. that they can be exercised during the severance period, or that they can't). These ranges are often well-known among employees when layoffs start to happen. Your friend could ask around to see if anyone can share information about those ranges and ensure that they're getting comparable treatment if they meet the same criteria. Occasionally, a company will try to short-change certain employees because perceived performance issues (whether accurate or inaccurate). If for some reason, your friend appears to be getting shortchanged relative to their peers, that can be worth pushing back on. However, if their package is line with other packages for their peers, there's probably no room to manoevre.
3. A lawyer could be worthwhile if:
A) Your friend is being significantly shortchanged relative to people who make about the same salary and have similar tenure (e.g. they're getting 10 weeks severance and everyone else is getting 20 or 30). But the lawyer likely will work on a contingency basis and seek a percentage (e.g. 30%) of any supplementary amount recovered. And the company may dig in its heels and not change its offer. So your friend could end up going months and months without seeing any payment. It might be a better deal to just take the money.
B) It appears that everyone, or a significant group that includes your friend, is not getting an offer package that meets industry norms or legal requirements. In some jurisdictions, there are employment laws that set a minimum number of weeks' severance for terminations below a certain number of employees (e.g. < 50), and b) set higher thresholds and additional protections when the company lays off a larger number of employees. Beyond that, in some jurisdictions (e.g. in Canada), the common law has established higher levels of protection beyond the statutory minimum. For example, the statute might say that employees are entitled to 1 week of severance (or pay in lieu of severance) for each year employed, but case law has established that a 50 year-old manager earning $200,000 a year is entitled to a year's severance or pay in lieu of severance. You can Google to find out what kind of standards (statute plus case law) apply in your jurisdiction without going to a lawyer. But if it looks like the company is significantly lowballing everyone, or a group, then it can be worth it to a lawyer. (A lawyer might also be more interested in taking the case if there's a group, because they'll earn more for not much more extra effort).
C) If your friend belongs to a protected group (e.g. by virtue of their race, origin, gender, sexual orientation, or age), and it appears that they have been lowballed compared to people in an unprotected group, then that could also be a good case to bring to a lawyer. It's relatively unusual for companies to discriminate in scenarios like this on the basis of race, origin or gender, but it's NOT unusual at all for layoffs to hit older workers (who often are more expensive) and women who have taken maternity leave off. If your friend belongs to a protected group, it's worth checking with other members of the group, to see if there is any pattern in terms of lowball offers.
4. The contract likely will have a non-disparagement clause and also some kind of NDA (non-disclosure agreement). The NDA can get in the way of talking to other employees - be discreet. Likewise, the non-disparagement clause can provide a company with grounds not to pay out, so your friend should avoid taking to social media to complain about what's happened.
5. You can find out a lot by going to the website of law firms that have an employment law practice. Try to find ones that are local (or at least within your state) and check to see what kinds of articles they've written about layoffs. Have a look at the LinkedIn pages of the key lawyers practising employment law to see what they're posting.
