is this discrimination or unfairness

[Dave A]

A single extension done like that and given the underlying reason (which it seems you clearly understand), I expect you will not be able to claim the benefits of Section 198B (i.e. employment has not automatically converted to an indefinite duration contract). The intent of the section is to prevent abuse of fixed term employment contracts; there is nothing to suggest such abuse here.

This means when that 1 month extension ended, your employment contract entirely legitimately ended by expiration.

Agreed, assuming Thobile was either a fixed term or part time employee. If, however, he was actually a temporary employee (i.e. placed by a temporary employment service provider), then there is a possibility of deemed permanent employment.

Please expand on how you arrive at this conclusion.
(If you rely on S 198A.3.b, I'll point out it is subject to S 198B, the implications of which we have already agreed in this instance).

Perhaps if you could clear up the difference between "Indefinite duration employment" and "permanent employment" per the LRA, that would probably help.
(This is causing massive difficulty for me to follow your logic as I confess, I can't find a definitive reference to permanent employment anywhere in the LRA).

[Greig Whitton]

Perhaps if you could clear up the difference between "Indefinite duration employment" and "permanent employment" per the LRA, that would probably help. (This is causing massive difficulty for me to follow your logic as I confess, I can't find a definitive reference to permanent employment anywhere in the LRA).

Section 8 of Schedule 8 references "permanent employment", but the reference is moot for our purposes (it has to do with probation).

My use of "indefinite" and "permanent" employment has caused unintended confusion. I introduced the distinction earlier this thread because I misunderstood your preceding post, so that was my bad (sorry!)