I think you would be correct Wolfpack if the owners were or have been negotiating in good faith. I don't think the reg-refs made much ground if that is the case. However I think the owners went all in for breaking the union. If that is the case, I don't think the benefits inherent to breaking the union outweigh the detriments to continuing in pursuit of that end. I do understand it and I can even understand how the owners could initially convince themselves that they could and should attempt it.
If that is the case, then I think there is now enough evidence that should suggest to the owners that they should simply negotiate their way out of this mess...that going all in to break the union was in the end not worth it.
That does not in any way suggest to me that this will be settled quickly even assuming that anything I have posted above this line is correct. But it does change the dynamics to one where actual negotiation can take place going forward. That at least says there is a light that I can see at the end of the tunnel. If in fact breaking the union has been their goal and they continue in that pursuit, then it becomes difficult for me to see the light at the end of the tunnel.