I thought you for concurrent delays you got time but not money, evidently not the case?

I always thought Option two below is the most common in Public Works projects. So if the owner has 3 delays equaling 30 cal. days and so does the contractor, = time extension and no comp. Is the above true, I have since learned concurrent delay is done 3 ways: - how would you "apportion" in the case above 50/50 of option 3 below is used? Do different agencies use different approaches? Approaches for dealing with concurrent delays: The issue of concurrent delay is dealt with differently in the various forms of contract. Importantly, it is not possible to argue that one approach is definitely "right". In general, there are three main approaches for dealing with the issue of concurrent delay. They are: Option One: Contractor has no entitlement to an extension of time if a concurrent delay occurs. Option Two: Contractor has an entitlement to an extension of time if a concurrent delay occurs, time but not compensation. Option Three: Causes of delay are apportioned between the parties and the Contractor receives an extension of time equal to the apportionment (for example, if the concurrent causes of a 10-day delay are apportioned 60:40 Owner: Contractor, the Contractor would receive a six-day extension of time).

Entitlement to time and/or money for concurrent delays depends on 1. the contract and 2. the legl jurisdiction, and 3. how the claim is structured (pacing, etc.).  No easy answers......  Depending where in the world you are the answers will be different, you can select from a range of resources on concurrent and parallel delays at: https://mosaicprojects.com.au/PMKI-ITC-020.php#Concurrent