Concept 04

(short) At all responsible levels, we ought to maintain a traditional “Right of Participation,” allowing a voting representation in reasonable proportion to the responsibility that each must discharge.
(long) Throughout our Conference structure, we ought to maintain at all responsible levels a traditional “Right of Participation”, taking care that each classification or group of our world servants shall be allowed a voting representation in reasonable proportion to the responsibility that each must discharge.

1. Primary principle(s): right of participation, trust, responsibility, democracy, egalitarianism, ownership
2. Other principles: acceptance, anonymity, consideration, faith, generosity, helpfulness, honesty, humility, patience, surrender, self-sacrifice, understanding, unity, peace

Readings:

• Twelve Concepts for World Service - pp. 17-21
• AA Service Manual - pp. S55-S56
• Twelve Concepts Illustrated -
• “The Incredible Tapestry” - February 1993 AA Grapevine

This is that middle concept of the “Right of Decision,” the “Right of Participation,” and the “Right of Appeal” rights outlined in Concepts 3-5.

Bill and his helpers have often been highly regarded as leaders or even divinely inspired.  Long before it was fashionable in business to include what we now routinely refer to as “stakeholders” in our decision making processes, the concepts outlined a process whereby Trustees, Delegates and Staff all have one vote at the table where decisions on AA policy and direction are set.

The hardest place I’ve seen to discern this participation principle is at the home group.  Who is allowed to vote on what decisions?  In groups where I’ve participated, the “rule” is often that anyone who regularly attends the meeting is welcome to provide input and opinion about the meeting (format, traditions, issues, etc.) but that where something affects AA as a whole (Intergroup policy, Area business, etc.), group non-members will refrain from voting (their vote is counted in their home group).

This has caused interesting challenges in my experience.  Due to personal circumstances, I can rarely attend the Wednesday meeting of my home group (I’m there at our main meeting every Saturday I’m available).  Recently, the group decided to follow the input of a member who is not a home group member but regularly attends the Wednesday meeting and changed their meeting format.  They changed it in a few ways that I object to pretty strongly.  The group has decided that the meeting is pretty autonomous (regarding format) so the meeting’s conscience can take it wherever it wants.  Bottom line, on the occasional Wednesday I am free, I go to a different meeting.  This is fine, I think and is in accordance with Tradition 4 as well as Concept 4.

The 12 Concepts Checklist (a service piece from the General Service Office), asks these questions about Concept 4:

• Do we understand the spiritual principles underlying the “Right of Participation”?
  • Principles:
• What does “in reasonable proportion” mean? Do we understand when it is appropriate for A.A. paid staff to have a vote at the General Service Conference or in our local service structure?
  • Principles:
• Do we expect that, because we are A.A. members, we should be allowed to vote at any group, even if we are not active members of that group?
  • Principles: