They got his name wrong on paychecks for 20 years — he sued the company and won $32,000 in compensation

For two decades, Mohamed, an employee at the software marketing firm Intergraph France, was known as Antoine in the workplace. Despite starting out as a sales engineer and steadily rising through the ranks, he was always addressed by a name that wasn’t his own. This continued right up until his departure from the company in 2017.

But two years later, he decided to speak out. Everyone at the company—from HR to email correspondence and even on his paychecks—referred to him as Antoine. It was a name he felt compelled to adopt from his very first day at work. According to Le Figaro, it was the company’s director who allegedly suggested he use a more universally acceptable name—from day one to the end.

This practice goes against French law, which holds that “a first name is part of a person’s civil status and constitutes a fundamental element of identity,” explains Henri Guyot, a lawyer with Ærige Avocats. According to Guyot, using an alternate name in a professional setting is only acceptable if it’s the employee’s own choice. Otherwise, it can constitute discrimination.

In this case, the employee didn’t need to prove he had suffered discrimination—only to present evidence suggesting unfavorable treatment. It was then the employer’s responsibility to prove that its actions were based on objective, non-discriminatory criteria. The company failed to do so, offering no proof that Mohamed had voluntarily chosen to go by Antoine—no documents, no statements, nothing.

Mohamed, on the other hand, did present proof: 243 pay stubs with the imposed name, statements from colleagues, and termination documents—all of which confirmed that “Antoine” was not his choice. He also submitted personal ID documents clearly showing that his real name was Mohamed.

$32,000 in damages

In February of this year, the Paris Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Mohamed, ordering the company to pay him $21,500 for racial discrimination and invasion of privacy, and an additional $10,500 for discriminatory moral harassment—bringing the total compensation to $32,000.

“This sends a powerful message to remind employers that any form of discrimination is unacceptable in the professional world,” Guyot emphasized.

The court linked the use of the false name to ongoing discriminatory moral harassment that persisted over two decades, visible through monthly pay slips and everyday workplace interactions. According to the lawyer, the length of time is irrelevant: “What matters is not how long the discrimination lasted, but the fact that it happened at all.”

Get your game on! Whether you’re into NFL touchdowns, NBA buzzer-beaters, world-class soccer goals, or MLB home runs, our app has it all.

Dive into live coverage, expert insights, breaking news, exclusive videos, and more – plus, stay updated on the latest in current affairs and entertainment. Download now for all-access coverage, right at your fingertips – anytime, anywhere.