The pastoral reason cited for these changes is so that more people will celebrate the feast than would happen if it were on a work day, or that people don't have to go to mass two days in a row. I find this disturbing. Here are the bishops, the very people who are the "keepers of the faith" telling us that they're OK with making work more important than our souls, and that going to mass is a "burden" which we shouldn't have to do more than absolutely necessary.
So what if they had a holy day of obligation on a Saturday and not many people came. Wouldn't that still be more than the zero people who were able to come to the mass that didn't happen? Is it too much to celebrate a feast day on a week day? I, for one, used to enjoy going to mass on my lunch hour. It not only gave me a spiritual break from an otherwise mundane day, but was an opportunity to find out who else at work was Catholic and have this common experience with them as a community within a community.
Moving or removing a feast day waters it down and shows us that it is not really important, that our day to day chores are more important. Take President's Day, which has become so much of a non-holiday in the US that many people don't even know what it means at all. It's not on any of the birthdays of the presidents it supposedly honors, but on a convenient day for disrupting the work week the least. And yet even President's Day is a day to put whatever it is about ahead of work.