Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 28565
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. TD-28415
 90-3-88-3-207
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee George S. Roukis when award was rendered.

 (American Train Dispatchers Association PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

 "(a) CSX Transportation, Inc. ('Carrier') violated its (former LSN) Train Dispatchers' basic schedule Agreement effective 12:Ola.m. December 15, 1986 when it permitted and/or required Train Dispatchers in its Jacksonville, Florida office who are not covered by said Agreement to exercise primary responsibility for the movement of trains on the Americus, Grimes, Enterprise, Richland and Dothan Subdivisions of the Mobile Division.

 (b) Because of said violation, the Carrier shall now compensate the senior extra Train Dispatcher available in the Mobile office as of the starting hour of each shift, Train Dispatchers, starting with first shift on December 15, 1986 and continuing on each shift and d
(c) In the event there are no extra Train Dispatchers available under the conditions set forth in paragraph (b) above, the claim shall be payable to the senior regularly assigned Train Dispatcher in the Mobile office who is available at such times.

 (d) The identities of individual Train Dispatchers eligible for the compensation claimed in paragraphs (b) and (c) above are readily ascertainable from the Carrier's records, and shall be determined by a joint check thereof in order to eliminate the necessity of presenting a multiplicity of daily claims."

 FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

 The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

 This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
Form 1 Award No. 28565
 Page 2 Docket No. TD-28415
 90-3-88-3-207

 The Organization contends that when Carrier permitted and/or required train dispatchers in its Jacksonville, Florida, office who were not covered by the former Louisville & Nashville Railroad Agreement to exercise primary responsibility for the the Mobile Division's supervisory control effective December 15, 1986, said action violated the former L & N Train Dispatchers' Agreement. The subdivisions transferred were
Specifically, the Organization maintains that while the duties of Chief, Night Chief, and Assistant Chief Dispatcher associated with these subdivisions were transferred to the Mobile Division, Carrier continued the Trick Train Dispatcher duties in the Jacksonville office. Accordingly, since the Mobile Division's seniority district was enlarged, the Organization argues that the duties of Trick Train Dispatcher accrued to employees under the former L & N Agreement.
In response, Carrier points out that when it realigned its Divisional boundaries in December, 1986, it was necessary to adjust some of the territory from one Division to another. Consequently, with new Division alignments it was not unusual for a Division to encompass more than one "Railroad" on that Division. This meant that employees covered under the former Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Agreement and the Louisville and Nashville Agreement were working on the Mobile Divisi SCL Trick Train Dispatchers reported to and were supervised by the Chief Dispatcher in Jacksonville, Florida. In eff administrative change, Carrier argues that it was not required to negotiate with the Organization.

 In considering this case, the Board concurs with Carrier's position. There has been no clear cut indisputable evidence that the Divisional realignments resulted in separ L & N employees worked exclusively on the Mobile Division. As a result of the realignment, specifically, the transfer of the five subdivisions, there has been no correlative showing that it was incumbent upon Carrier to maintain a complete separation of Divisional activities, particularly, where there was a distinct commingling of SCL and L & N employees at Mobile. Since the Divisional realignments were not akin to the formal the Organization's Claim. Argument in and of itself is not a substitute for probative evidence.

                        A W A R D


        Claim denied.

Form 1 Award No. 28565
 Page 3 Docket No. TD-28415
 90-3-88-3-207
 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
 By Order of Third Division

 Attest:
        ancy J.~ y,~ - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 27th day of September 1990.