I don't know, nor can control, what others say or do. Nor do I particularly care, I'll leave you to dabble in hypotheticals. Just don't see how it plays out differently under Trump, or any other administration for that matter.
Can you be more specific about what you would do to "put more pressure" on the railroads? What would you say publicly to compel them to move off of their terms?
It's a leverage problem; people barely think about the railroad industry and, for years, it was always funny to hear people muse about how "railroad are dying".... they are very much not dead and are vitally critical for getting goods from point A to point B. The supply chain issues of the past couple of years are just a taste of what it is like when that cog in the economy isn't operating at 100%, the cog just not working for days at a time would be devastating to the American economy. It would impact goods getting to shelves at the grocery stores, commodities such as metals and lumber getting to manufacturers (which would likely negatively impact a lot of blue collar union workers in other industries, I might add), coal from the Powder River Basin in Wyoming or other areas getting to coal power plants that are still in use (without which may lead to pressure on our energy grid). Those are just a few examples of the second-order effects that would come from even just a few days without the rails operating, it would touch just about every American in one way or another.
So again, that's the decision: that or enforcing the deal. And I'm guessing just about everyone in that position, including Presidents Ewsieg or MTU or whoever, enforces the deal. That doesn't mean that railroad workers shouldn't get sick time or that Presidents shouldn't expect criticism for whatever decision they make when given two bad choices, but any logical person in that position is going to take the option that doesn't bring about economic catastrophe.