Will an extension of the contract in the 4th year become a permanent contract?

Questioner

I work in primary education and now have a temporary extension of 0.225 to my permanent contract of 0.575 for the 4th school year in a row. This temporary extension should now become permanent because it is a temporary piece for the 4th time. I have requested to convert the temporary piece of my contract to a permanent contract. In response I get the following explanation: Even if an appointment is extended annually, the hours have not become fixed as is assumed. There is no question of successive employment relationships within the meaning of article 7:668a paragraph 1 under b BW. A temporary extension is an adjustment of the conditions of an existing employment contract; there is no question of successive employment contracts. This does not concern new employment relationships entered into each time, it concerns an extension of the number of hours within an existing permanent contract. There is therefore no question of a chain of successive employment relationships. There was a single employment relationship in which the number of hours to be worked was periodically extended. In support of this, the ruling of the Limburg District Court of 11 December 2019 (ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2019:11145) is used. In accordance with article 3.4 under b. of the Collective Labour Agreement for Primary Education, the temporary extension of the scope of a position expires by operation of law if the relevant activities are no longer assigned to the employee. This therefore concerns the 'expiration of part of the scope of the position' and not 'the end of a temporary employment relationship'. I have been doing the same tasks at the same school for the fourth year now: I work 2 days as a teacher of the plus class, I work one day as a group teacher and I work one day as a building coordinator. Nothing has changed in all those years (except that that day as a group teacher was 2 years in group 3 and now for the 2nd year in group 5). So there are no temporary tasks. That is why I think I am entitled to a permanent contract of 0.8 instead of a permanent contract of 0.575 with an extension of 0.225. Is the above explanation correct in this situation or am I still entitled to a permanent contract for 0.8? I'd like to hear it. Thank you in advance!

Lawyer

First of all, only 1 ruling by the Limburg court is referred to. This is not a ruling by the highest judicial body in the field of employment law. This means that the criterion is not fixed by definition. In addition, a ruling always relates to a specific case. In the Limburg case, it was an extension due to absent employees and it was also stated each time that the work would stop when the employee(s) were back at work. The last extension was about a specific project. This could be said that it was always clearly something temporary, where a permanent employment contract for that number of hours was not the underlying idea for either party. From your story I seem to be able to gather that there is no question of temporary replacement or a specific short-term project. Then the case could be completely different. If you require legal assistance, please feel free to contact me without obligation.