Great points, I'll get on it

I think tests are still wrong.

For example. From your tests:

consolidate([ 4, 8 ], [ 5, 6 ], [ 9, 11 ], [ 2, 5 ] ])
Result lengths should match. [Expected 1 got 2]
expected result: [9,11]

In the kata description you say that the result of this test should be: [[2,8],[9,11]]

I think you need to decide if two contiguous time intervals must be consolidated in one or not.

Another example:

consolidate( [ [ -2, 0 ],
[ 0, 0 ],
[ 4, 11 ],
[ 22, 500 ],
[ 1, 11 ],
[ -1, -1 ],
[ 7, 8 ],
[ 500, 500 ] ]));

I think the result should be: [ [ -2, 11 ], [ 22, 500 ] ]

But your tests say that: Result lengths should match. [Expected 1 got 2]
expected result: [22,500]

My guess is that your solution is wrong.

I updated the test scripts, they are now more flexible, verbose and and easy to add scenarios to. I'm going to need collaborators to add meaningful scenarios.

Excelent points, I haven't had time to properly write my tests.
It's something I plan to do sometime during the day. Any help or suggestion is really appreciated. (This is my first time writing a Kata)

As for the time slots, order shouldn't matter. I'll have to make the tests more permissive.

Hmmm. Are you sure your test cases are okay? I pass the example test case, but apparently not the real ones. And the only feedback I get is Set A.

When I look at the data sent in and what my code produces, it seems correct.

Are there any restrictions on the order of the resulting time slots? I return mine in natural order, but maybe the test cases expect something else?