[darrenf]

To me in the UK, "fire" generally refers to letting someone go because of incompetence, bad behaviour, or whatever - the role will still exist but the individual is let go. In which case you're entitled to whatever your contract says, which is probably "stop now and we'll pay off your notice period". Whereas layoffs and redundancies mean the roles are disappearing, the individuals being a side-effect (indeed, you aren't legally allowed to target individuals AIUI. Happy to be corrected on this, though)

I've never been fired, but I have been made redundant twice. Both times I'd not been in the role longer than 2 years which meant I was legally entitled to fuck all. First time, that's exactly what I got. Second time, the company was laying off such a significant proportion of staff that they were mandated to negotiate with those affected and come to an agreement about notice, pay, etc. They came with an OK offer; the employees requested a lot more; the company met us half way. Being entitled to nothing, I was very happy with what I ended up taking home :)

[mytailorisrich]

Note that they are not require to negotiate notice, pay, etc. which are already specified in contracts and statutes.

What they are required to do if they plan to make more than 20 people redundant is to conduct a formal 'consulation', which means that they have to discuss with the employees potentially concerned about the reasons and how to keep redundancies to a minimum.

Companies may offer more than they have to for the sake of their reputation and for goodwill, and (maybe especially) to make employees sign terms that they won't sue and won't discuss the matter.

[darrenf]

You’re right, of course. Consultation was the word I failed to recall. In both my redundancies, notice periods were negotiated because both employers wanted us to work longer than our notice. “We’re getting rid of your roles, but can you just deliver this unreasonable project first?”

[mytailorisrich]

That does wonder for motivation and quality of work...