This seems to be an argument that one scheduling system is worse than the previous. However, one of the major objectives of a scheduling system is to reduce cost, which this seems to have done. What is the downside?
You are missing the key pay of the question: reduce costs for whom? Since railroads are effectively a (regulated) monopoly reducing costs for Norfolk Southern or CSX can mean Wall Street profits combined with worse service for customers at the same price.
Wouldn't that be a question for regulators then in terms of how much profit can be extracted without lowering costs or using the savings on other investments?