Don't pretend that the government is without fault here. There's plenty of tax fraud that happens using social security numbers. People can steal your tax refund or even evade taxes by pushing them onto you through your social security number. The system is messed up, and the government is largely responsible for the mess. The Social Security Administration has to same security holes.
What you describe is ideal, but it's not what actually happened. The social security number has been used as identifier and proof of identification for a long time. Part of the problem is that it's from a time when technology did not allow anything more complicated. That's no longer an excuse though. Social security numbers should have been upgraded long ago.
That is a verbal amendment to your employment contract, and as long as you do not sign an additional contract that somehow says "No, this actually means this" feel free to fuck shit up in court. That is a breach of contract and the company will be liable for damages (if any) and at least be required to give up any assumed license.
Verbal employment contracts are enforceable in in all 50 states.
This is absolutely 100% false and a good example of why you shouldn't take legal advice from the internet.
When you have a written contract, any and all verbal contracts or amendments mean absolutely nothing. It's called the "four corners doctrine" and is a pretty universal judicial practice. Written contracts always, ALWAYS supersede any verbal agreements: with a written contract in hand, any mentions of oral discussions are irrelevant and will fall on deaf ears.
I can't really believe this - if both parties agreed an alternate contract was made orally then the court would effectively rule against both parties in favour of supporting a knowingly false contract?
Yes, but that's not what was claimed. Of course if it can't be established that there was any further [alteration of the] contract then the written contract will be relied on. But that doesn't really seem to be the heart of what the Four Corners doctrine is about.
This is the difference between theory and practice.
Yes, if A and B walk into court and say that the verbal contract exists, it is enforceable. But in the common case, A will deny that the contract existed (or disagree on the terms) AMD without any evidence, the contract is lost.
Now if there is evidence (both sides had taken specific actions obviously in accordance with the verbal contrac, that they otherwise would have no reason to do), ther might be a case. But really, without evidence, the abstract rule will not connecg to concrete instances. Get evidence for everything.
What you describe is ideal, but it's not what actually happened. The social security number has been used as identifier and proof of identification for a long time. Part of the problem is that it's from a time when technology did not allow anything more complicated. That's no longer an excuse though. Social security numbers should have been upgraded long ago.