Actually, the QRH procedure is ENG DUAL FAILURE (fuel remaining).
ENG FAIL WARNING is triggered if affected engine core goes below idle, only.
My conclusion, therefore, is that pilots are still needed in an airplane, no matter how modern and computerized it is. Because not every case has been studied and laid down in FCOMs or QRHs. Airmanship is still required. Experience is still a very valuable tool in a flight deck.
Maybe if they did a video of how to handle such a failure (like those videos of TAP, the portuguese airline, where the pilots look like robots but that it took hundreds of takes for each failure) maybe, I say, there would be a couple of things that could have been done better. But it is the overall performance and decision making of the crew that counts, in a totally unexpected scenario. They adapted quickly to it, to the dreadful reality, and ditched nicely on the Hudson, with no victims. And of course they had a little bit of luck.
A less experienced, robotic, "CRM-SOP fanatic" crew could have flown the airplane to the ground and crashed after saying a lot of call outs and a lot of "I have controls I have radio you have controls you have radio, get the QRH..." and trying to find what the hell to do because no ECAM nor QRH says what to do in that case, instead of quickly assessing the situation and coordinating with each other naturally, like Sully and Skyles, instead, did.
They acted like excellent human pilots and succeeded.