[Businessmtg] Service Positions - Shared Positions

[Jerry H.]

Biz-Pals,

While the idea of sharing service seems on its face a kind and helpful means of resolving ASP's inability to fill its many vacant service positions, in the end it would likely only make matters worse. Al-Anon's Principles are the result of decades of experience resolving problems which have come up, both in AA and Al-Anon, and have kept these two programs functioning in light of the many shortcomings of their members. Altering our hard-earned practices in light of all this experience seems foolhardy to me.

Steve's analysis of how the Concepts apply to this shared service position proposal is spot on. Taking that path eventually brings discord and, worse, continue to ignore the actual problems which have brought us to this fix in the first place. I see these problems as two-fold:

1) Business Meeting Membership
The ASP general membership does not participate sufficiently in the business side of ASP. Membership in the Business Meeting (one of the requirements for standing for those service positions which include a seat on the Steering Committee) is low.
Those few who do attend often do so repeatedly, and of those only some are willing to step into service at the SC level. Eventually we end up in the current situation - positions with duties necessary for ASP's function and health go unfilled. Those duties then get done by existing Steering Commitee members, effectively creating another situation: members filling more than one service position which is against Al-Anon's suggestions based on all that experience I mentioned above.

2) ASP's Requirements for Steering Committee Level Service
We're in a pickle where we have multiple SC positions unfilled and very few willing and qualified by ASP to fill them. Because of ASP's requirement that candidates have at least one year's prior experience in certain other ASP services before being eligible to stand for a Steering Committee position, even those beginning service in those qualifying service positions are up to a year away from being eligible. From those who become eligible we cannot expect that each or indeed any would be willing to serve on a SC service position.
Can ASP continue to function this way? Well, so far Steve and Anne have kept filling their own and other SC positions and have managed. But is this Al-Anon when the few do most of the work? What has happened to the principle of rotation of office? What happens when they or others have had enough and step down? This is not the Al-Anon I've known in my over 30 years of attendance and service, f2f and on-line.
To date there have been discussions of lowering the one-year ASP service requirement and possibly qualifying Al-Anon members from traditional face-to-face Al-Anon meetings based on their service experiences there. Nope and nope. So here we still are. Year after year no progress. Same problem.
Does our new recognition as an Al-Anon Group, just like all those f2f groups, put us in the position where we might now put our service qualifications on a par with traditional Al-Anon Groups, or did we seek recognition and some sort of equality only to continue to insist on our differences? Have the legitimate reasons we have for requiring prior ASP service caused problems which are greater than those which might come to light if our qualifications were altered?

I have always been a firm believer in the principle of rotation of office. Participation IS the key to harmony. If a Group is unable to fill its service positions groups either adapt, change, fail, or fall under the input of fewer people, weakening the effectiveness of the concept of the Group Conscience. So far we are in the Adapt phase with no demonstrated willingness to Change. Not a position to remain in for much longer I would hope.

In service,
Jerry
_