>My point was that if an operator wants the union to accept a new contract without conductors it has a better chance of being ratified if the laid off conductors have the first chance to become engineers assuming they can qualify.

Real life intervenes: engineers and conductors are separate crafts represented by separate unions (there are a few notable exception to this, of which Amtrak is not one). This means that on RRs where engineers are represented by the BLE, it is quite free to agree to go E-only without any input from the trainmen [UTU/SMART] (and has done so here and there). Because of how the UTU got the beltpack agreement and what it contains, the Big E could care less whether trainmen have a job or not (except of course for those properties where the BLE holds the trainmen's contract).