Selling Books and Literature to outside organizations at
the cost of publishing would not produce any profit. How
could that violate our tradition of self support? This is a not-for-profit service. You
wrote two reasons for our tradition of self support.
There is a third: We want the world to look at A.A.
in the most favorable way possible. Supporting our own
fellowship, without using anyone else's money, enhances
our public view, as part of our public relations policy.
The irresponsible have become responsible. ANONYMOUS
"Selling A.A. literature at cost price to outside organizations would still go against princple of Tradition Seven because the money to pay for the literature would
still be coming from outside contributions."
Our goal has always been to become fully self-supporting
using only voluntary contributions from our own members.
Using profit from the sale of Books and Literature to
support our organization violates tradition seven. Profits
made by selling Books and literature are not voluntary
contributions. We want this material to be available to
anyone who needs it or wants it. If we sell it at the
costs of publishing there would be no profit to be
concerned about. That has always been our goal. But
instead of moving toward the goal, we just keep
moving further away from it. Our leaders keep going
in another direction, down a dangerous path.
I certainly can not understand how the sale of
information about A.A. could violate Tradition Seven,
if it is sold at cost. Are you suggesting that we
print it and give it away to outside organizations
for free. I would consider that to border on
agressive advertising. I think you are saying that
we ought not make our books and literature available
to organizations outside of A.A. That makes no sense to me. Are we not encouraged to "cooperate"? ANONYMOUS
I had a look at prices of the 4th edition Alcoholics Anonymous Big Book (hardback B1), on the literature order forms of four intergroups. Prices ranged from $8.15- $9.75.
The Hazelden price for the 4th edition hardcover is $11.75, $2.00 more. I don’t agree with outside enterprises profiting from the sale of A.A. literature. Once the businessmen (Promoters as Bill W. called them) both in and outside the fellowship, get the idea that there’s shed loads of money to be made out of A.A., then the fellowship will be finished. I think this process has begun and needs to be turned around. Our traditions are supposed to protect A.A. from exploitation from within and outside the fellowship. Concept XII, Warranty Five states that “Individuals, sometimes outside organizations may try to use the A.A. name for their own private purposes” that we should make their deviations from traditions “unprofitable or unwise”. It is my responsibility, your responsibility, and for all those in service, at every level, from AA groups to the General Service Board and the General Service Conference, to see that the General Warranties of Conference are upheld. I think we face ultimate collapse if they are not. Co-operation does not extend to facilitating the means by which businesses or individuals can make money out of AA.
Concept XII, Warranty Five: (The AA Service Manual Combined with the Twelve Concepts for World Service, pp 67-72) http://www.aa.org/pdf/products/en_bm-31.pdf
Back to Basics came from stories told to Wally P. by James A. H., who supposedly got sober a day before Bill W. H. told Wally how AA operated in the forties, which was strange since H. never attended an AA meeting until his granddaughter needed help in the eighties. Much documented information on H. can be found on the AA history lovers site.
James A.H. might have told Wally P. some stories, how true they are is anyone's guess. When it comes to AA history I think it best to stick to conference approved literature and treat the rest with normal caution. More Documented information on H and Wally P can be found on the aacultwatch site. Once you cut under some of the vitriolic sarcasm directed at cult-like behaviour in AA, I found it has provided me with some useful information. It has helped me to make some sense of what has been going on in my intergroup.
The Back to Basics groups were attempts to reverse some
of the mistakes which had occured in A.A. in the 1970's.
The cult nature of A.A. was becoming recognized. The
movement was honorable, but just went too far "back",
to the edge of the Oxford Group Society. Active alcoholics
have great difficulty with that religious/spiritual
approach. Bill realized that and separated from O.G
1937-1938. Dr. Bob remained attached to the Oxford
Groups until 1940. The Akron groups were more
attached to the Oxford Groups. It must have been
very difficult for Bill and Dr. Bob to leave O.G.
Both had gotten sober using O.G. principles and groups.
The founder of the "Back to Basics" passed away a
few years ago. He had gotten sober with Bill and Dr.
Bob in 1934, but was not involved in the formation
of our A.A. fellowship.
Some of this posting is history, as I remember
reading, and some is my own opinion. In my locale
one meeting is called back to basics, but that is just
the name of the group. The Back to Basics groups
claimed 200,000 members at one point. ANONYMOUS
It is not honourable to break A.A. Traditions. Breaking with Traditions jeopardises our unity and future. This is well documented in our history. I have read Wally P’s books. I’m not sure whether he is an alcoholic genuinely suffering a resurgence of delusions of grandeur, or whether he is a callous conman who knows exactly what he is doing in order to manipulate and exploit the emotionally vulnerable, for money, power, and prestige. Creating a doctrine of how to run AA meetings, how to sponsor newcomers and how to listen to god is against the General Warranties of Conference (Warranty Five): “...We have no doctrine to that has to be maintained. We have no membership that has to be enlarged. We have no authority that has to be supported. We have no prestige, power, or pride that has to be satisfied…” Going against these warranties of Conference jeopardises our unity and future.
An extract from a post on this forum:
“Does the "Back to Basics" movement still exist? I tried to find them a few years back. I was offered a "start up kit" for a price of about $60.00.” (Extract, AA Grapevine ‘I Say’ Forum: Traditions: ‘Re:Re:AA Hasn’t Folded Yet’: Wed, 2011-12-07 06:57)
An extract from Tradition Seven:
“On every lip were the words, ‘You can’t mix A.A. and money. We shall have to separate the spiritual from the material.’ We took this violent new tack because here and there members had tried to make money out of their A.A. connections, and we feared we’d be exploited. Now and then, grateful benefactors had endowed clubhouses, and as a result there was sometimes outside interference in our affairs…” (Extract, Tradition Seven)
Concept XII, Warranty Five: (The AA Service Manual Combined with the Twelve Concepts for World Service, pp 67-72) http://www.aa.org/pdf/products/en_bm-31.pdf
Our Forgotten Traditions
My name is Mike, alcoholic, sober since March 1990.
The purpose of AA groups is to carry our message of recovery through the teaching and practice of the steps and traditions. Few groups conduct meetings that comply with the traditions.
Traditions are essential in maintaining the unity and survival of groups. There is little unity without group inventory meetings, guided by the traditions. The traditions identify what group problems there are and how to fix them?
Let me take you through meetings I attend to see and hear them from the seat I sit in, by describing how meetings fail to follow traditions.
Most groups begin meetings reading the Preamble, Blue Card and Traditions then ignore them throughout the remainder of the meeting. They talk the talk but fail to walk the walk.
Members arrive at meetings and find love-ins complete with hugging, kissing and occasional 13th stepping. These practices cross personal boundaries and confuse newcomers about what AA is and what it is not.
Shouting and chanting breaches AA tradition. When sharing we begin, “My name is ….and I’m an alcoholic.” This is followed by members chanting, “Hi ….”, and is repeated after all introductions. We not only introduce ourselves, but more importantly, are making a humble admission of steps 1 and 5. We cheapen the process by shouting the speaker’s name. Most shout, “Thanks ….” after every speaker. Only Chairpersons should thank speakers to eliminate the pep rally mentality of shouting and religious cult practice of chanting. When speakers fail to state their names some shout, “Who are you”, to remind them to introduce themselves. This practice ignores the principal of personal anonymity and is none of our business.
Meetings end with a closing prayer. The Chairperson states, “For those who wish let’s join hands for the Serenity/Lord’s Prayer”. All meeting prayer should cease if newcomers, atheists, agnostics and non- Christians are pressured into religious cult practices (prayer circles) or religious specific prayers (Christian Lord’s Prayer). Following prayer we flap our arms while shouting a farewell chant, “Keep coming back it works if you work it, so work it”. To newcomers and visitors shouting and chanting must appear ridiculous at best and bizarre at worst. These rituals cheapen the decorum of our meetings, drive members away and do nothing to enhance the principal of attraction.
Outside issues break traditions 5 and 10. Primary purpose is lost or diluted when talk of drugs, smoking, eating disorders, sexual orientation, religion and politics are encouraged or condoned. Many think it their right to discuss outside issues in today’s anything goes meetings. Many are unable to identify with outside issues and the power of attraction and motivation to return is lost.
Treatment centre practices have no place in AA meetings. Herd mentality has accepted them in AA without question. We forget or ignore they detract from the dignity, humility and decorum of our meetings and break with our traditions.
There are two ways members respond to these issues. First is to say, “I like my meetings just the way they are” and are unwilling to make changes regardless of the consequences; or are willing to change, at the personal and group level, those things that will make AA more attractive and inclusive to all. Groups are folding and AA membership is in decline due to our unwillingness to make needed changes. We must not forget that in applying the traditions, the good is always the enemy of the best.
I hope and pray that my home group sticks to AA’s traditions else I will be leaving AA. God help me if it comes to that!
In today's A.A. we are so busy studying the Big Book
and working the steps, that we don't have time to be
concerned with the "traditions". The belief is that A.A.
is alive and well and wonderful. That is the belief of
most A.A. members today. Knowing about the traditions,
is not the same as understanding and obeying them.
Tradition Twelve is about humility and sacrifice.
We have to give up that "look how great I am, now that
I am sober". "My name is Joe Johnson and I am an alcoholic. Call me any time and I will help you with any problem."
Using last names is a violation of 11 and 12. We confuse
the newcomer. Am I "less than", if I don't give my
last name. Am I so important that my full name needs
to be given? What does anonymous mean? Doesn't it mean
without name? Pride leads the procession of the seven
deadly sins. Pride not only harms the A.A. member: It
harms A.A. as a whole. Spiritual pride is nauseating
to alcoholics approaching us.
Bill writes about "fools gold", in an article to
the grapevine. I think it is "Humility for Today"
in the Language of the Heart book. But we are too
busy pounding the Big Book (a story book, not a study
book), and cramming the steps down everyone's throat,
(forgetting that the steps are but suggestions), to
allow any real humility to enter.
Page 199 in "As Bill Sees It", and the related
articles in Language of the Heart will make this
message easy to understand. ANONYMOUS
I really like what you've said about folks who give both their first and last names. For some reason, it has always bothered me and you've helped me now to articulate how. Pride is a bugger to deal with, that's for sure. I'll have to check out that article in the Language of the Heart. Sounds like a good one! Thanks!
Try rereading that bb. its our basic texbook. no, not a story book,a textbook. like an algebra book in school. it even says its purpose is to show you precisely how we recovere
d. I suggest you read it. that book will protect you from people like me who know it all.
I think it says that the purpose of the Big Book was
to tell US how THEY recovered. Think,Think,Think. Rose
The purpose of the book is to introduce you to a power greater than yourself that can INTUTIVELY handle situation that us to baffle US as the outside sponsorship system diverts new comers by preying on them as if they know something someone already here doesn’t – Take a closer look at the damage so you can transmit the GOOD we call God not a sponsor.
Forward to first aditions says "we" (im looking at it right now)
I can also say we because this is what i "try" to follow as well.
I also like page 29 of the big book, it says further on clear cut directions are given showing how we recoverd.
If anyone out there has sobered up some other way, great for you. G od knows i have tried other methods and failed.
I have learned that trying to practice the AA program as described in the big book has worked wonderful for me since 1992, my sponsor since 1981, and his sponsor in the 70's and so on.
I have also learned i have to keep a close watch on my rationalizing alcoholic mind. one way i do this is by following the big book. it helps me stay away from my old ideas that i know it all.
Corey: God Bless you, too. We need all the help we can get.
I will take your advice and read the Big Book through
again. I prefer reading it with a group, a chapter each
week. I think that I can get a better understanding of
what Bill is trying to tell us, listening and sharing with
others. I have read it many times but not lately.
I consider the Big Book to be a Story Book. It is the
story of How Many Thousands of Men and Women Have Recovered from Alcoholism. This I read on the first pages. Almost all were men. The first woman whose story appeared
in the Big Book drank again.
I understand that the book was written to tell the story
of how the first one hundred alcoholics recovered. It
originally read: To show other alcoholics how THEY
can recover. This was changed just before the first
B. B. was printed. Bill obeyed the advice of others,
who understood the difference in meaning.
Maybe you consider them to mean the same thing. But
please look again. I believe that we push alcoholics
away by telling them what to do. Alcoholics seem to have
a rebellious nature. How can I go wrong if I just tell
them what I was like, what happened to me, and what I
am like now? Hopefully they can see what I am like now.
Attraction, no promotion of any kind. Thank them
for listening. This is how I stay sober by talking to
the newer person, or other A.A. members. I help no
one by giving directions. I just tell them what I
did. Sounds a bit self-centered but I believe that
is How It Works. And, thanks for your persistence.
Although it may not look like it at times, Our
goal is the same: To help as many alcoholics as
possible, and to preserve the solution to alcoholism
for future generations. They are going to need it.
Good stuff. aside from the occasional suggestion, i am usually posting what i try to do. i do the same at meetings. I share my experience,strength, and hope. alcoholics are so self centered and sensitive that they often think Im telling them what to do when i am really just sharing how i work this program.
I think you would be interested in Harry Tiebouts description of the alcoholics character on page 311 in AA comes of age. after reading ot, its a miracle any of us are alive.
Its great to have these discussions!
Good luck and God bless
And yet the alcoholic lives! What do you think of the
membership numbers on the opposite page, page 310? It was
the membership numbers which propelled me into this
obsession, my concern for A.A.'s future. Did you ever write
GSO for those figures? I ask you and all A.A. members to
write GSO and ask for the list with membership numbers
from 1935 to the present.
Reading Dr. Harry M. Tiebout's discription of the
alcoholic nature, it is hard to believe than any of us
recover. I see that the only way we can help a new
person to recover is to let him/her remain in control
of their own destiny. Allow them to chose sobriety
or drunkardness of their own free will. We ought to just
tell them how we were set free. Exactly what happened
to me. Do not piously say "Well, if you want what I have
you will have to do what I did." That approach re-sets
the rebellious nature of the alcoholic, drinking or not.
Let the group do the teaching. Individually I just
carry my own limited message. Dr. Tiebout was educated
about alcoholism by his experience with Marty M. and
Bill W. The Dr. believed what he saw and heard with
his own eyes and ears. Good reading A.A.C.A. ANONYMOUS
Anonymous chose a very good theme for his post, "forgotten or unlearned." It's apparent that he has either forgotten what our anonymity tradition says or he never really learned it in the first place. I suggest he read the first article in the Fall 2012 "Box 459."
Alexander Pope (not an AA member) said, "A little learning is a dangerous thing, meaning a small amount of knowledge can mislead people into thinking that they are more expert than they really are.
I did find the issue of the fall BOX 459. There is
plenty to dispute my opinion that the use of last
names in AA meetings violates Tradition 11 or 12.
Using last names when sharing at meetings is not
an issue in my locale. We just don't do it. Very
seldom do I hear anyone state their last name, unless
it is someone visiting from another state.
I believe that Dr. Bob probably made that statement
about remaining anonymous at any level than at the level
of press, radio and film. At that time members needed
to reach each other. It may have been necessary to
state full names. Today we have answering service
committees to take calls. Our full names are
necessary for that service.
My main concern is that newcomers may be confused
if some members give their full names while sharing and others do not.
Is it required or not? The newcomer may not want his/her
last name disclosed. But they need to be able to fit in.
I do not claim to be an expert of alcoholism or
an A.A. expert. But I have been here a long time and
I have seen a lot. I have seen meetings change from
a place of reverence to a chanting bunch of amateurish
teachers and preachers. I have seen a fellowship of
men and women become a TWELVE STEP PROGRAM, only one
of many such programs. I have seen our membership
diminish. We grew at the rate of doubling about
every ten years for 57 years to our present stagnation. We have about two
hundred thousand members less than we had two
I believe those members who cannot see anything
wrong with stating last names when they share are
the same members who can't see how dangerous it
is to continue using profits from the sale of books
and literature to run our General Service Office.
Our 1986 General Service Board issued a warning
which was part of our Service Manual. Our current
GSB has deleted the warning, probably with approval
from the membership, through our delegates.
Alcoholics Anonymous has been in trouble for
at least two decades, from top to bottom, or is it
from bottom to top.
I have no "axe to grind". I took a major part in changing our fellowship to a religion. I became an
amateur teacher, advisor. Trying to unlearn something
that I taught has been difficult. But A.A. is failing,
and may eventually just die. I think there will always
be clusters of sober alcoholics staying sober
together. But the A.A. fellowship which I found in
1970 hardly exists any more. I sincerely doubt that
the A.A. of the seventies will ever return, but I
have given it my best effort. We are failing so
many suffering alcoholics and their families today.
We have a real solution to this deadly disease. We
have forgotten how to use it. Most A.A. members
never learned it in the first place. ANONYMOUS
Jim S. Could you be a little more specific? What is
it that I have forgotton or have not learned? Maybe you
can teach me a thing or two: maybe a little constructive
criticism. I admit that my mind may be narrow, but I do
try not to close it completely.
We have two traditions out of twelve that focus on
anonymity. Bill must have considered it from all view
points. Bill himself violated tradition 11 by allowing
himself to be filmed, teaching the steps and traditions.
The A.A. critics had a field day with that film. Bill
was old and ill, but his friends ought to have known
better than to allow him to be filmed. I suspect they
talked him into it, due to ignorance.
I do not have a copy of the Fall issue of BOX 459
but look forward to reading it.
Do you think we ought to use last names at meetings?
Most members of my home group know my last name, but
I do not use it when sharing. I am really not that
important. I may have thought so at one time. I
don't even use my name on this forum. Who I am
is just not that important.
Again, please advise me about what I should
learn about the tradition on anonymity. I will
read and consider your comments, (as I always do).
Joe Johnson or J.J.
I stumbled onto this site after Googling "AA Traditions Study." Today, I was part of a new meeting called the Tuesday Night Traditions, it was our first meeting with 9 members present...after reading your post, I just want to thank you for your experience.
San Lorenzo, CA
It is incouraging to hear of another new traditions
meeting. The traditions were origionally called Twelve
points to assure our future. Bill W. was consistantly
writing about concerns for A.A.'s future. He wanted
the fellowship to be around for a thousand years.
A close study of the traditions as written in the
12 + 12, supplemented seriously by the discussion of
the Traditions in
the books A.A. Comes of Age, and Language of the
Heart book, and obedience to these principles will
assure our future. Knowing about them and even
understanding them is just not going to be
enough. We must obey them as written, without
distorting them for our own purposes.
Our first tradition stresses our need for
unity. Yet we form "special purpose" groups. I believe
the young peoples movement violated this tradition,
by separating young members from Mainstream A.A.
The second tradition is ignored by simply not
having group conscience meetings. How can God be
expressed by the group conscience, if we just allow
a few members to dominate.
Tradition three is ignored by allowing non-alcoholics
to participate in A.A. meetings. At a closed meeting,
non-alcoholics ought not attend. At an open meeting
non-alcoholics can attend as observers. They ought
not "participate". The desire to stop drinking is a
REQUIREMENT for A.A. membership. The wonderful part of
the open meeting is that a potential member can attend
just to check us out. The prospect can observe without
any commitment at all. Family and friends can come to
observe and find help for the suffering alcoholic, and
in turn eliminate the cause of their own suffering.
Tradition Four is often violated by ignoring the
two storm signals Bill wrote about. Most A.A. members
read Tradition as "Each Group can do as it pleases."
Tradition Five is distorted. It is the purpose of
the Group to carry the message. Many A.A. members think
they are responsible to carry their own message to
others. It is the responsibility of the group.
Violation of Tradition six is obvious. We have lent
the A.A. name to all kinds of enterprises, financed by
governments, and insurance companies. They may not
use the name A.A. but it is implied.
Our seventh tradition is being violated in several
ways. We accept free rents for some of our meetings,
or pay a reduced rent because we are "A.A. We continue
to use profits from the sale of books and literature
to fund our headquarters. It has always been a goal to
sell books and literature at cost to everyone. We have
moved further from that goal instead of moving toward
it. Very few members today understand the immense value
of our tradition of self support. It has to do with the
way the general public looks at Alcoholics Anonymous.
The public's approval of A.A. is extremely important
to our future survival. Self-Supporting Alcoholics??
Whoever heard of such a thing?? Impressive!
Keep that traditions meeting open, even if only
a few show up at first. Keep the doors open. They
will come. When enough of our members finally
recognize our mistakes, we can turn this ship
around. Those are words from my area delegate. ANONYMOUS
Very few A.A. members have any understanding of the
immense value of our seventh tradition of self support.
Obviously our trusted servants do not understand what
it means or for some reason are downplaying the value
of the tradition. "They" have deleted the warning from
page S74 of our service manual. The paragraph beginning
with "In 1986" was removed from the 2011-2012 edition
of the Service Manual. This warning was issued by the
General Service Board of 1986.
There was a period of time when the reputation of
our fellowship was better than our actual character.
Much of this respect was due to the fact that A.A.
insisted on supporting itself fully by contributions
from its own members, declining any contributions
from any other sources.
Income earned from our Book and Literature Business
comes from sales to our members and from outside
sources. Using profit from the sale of Books and
Literature to fund our services is a violation
of that valuable tradition of self support.
The answer to the dilemma is to limit spending
to the money sent in by members and groups. SPEND WHAT
WE SEND! If our membership feels that a service is
important enough to fund, we will pay for it. But
let the membership decide. Don't spend the money
and then expect us to pay the bill.
Until we return to obedience to our traditions,
our relations with the general public will continue
to suffer. ANONYMOUS
Our tradition of self-support did not originate with Bill W. or his friends. It came from the mind of John D.
Rockefellow, Jr. Bill was certainly crushed when, after
that dinner which Rockefellow sponsered, he watched all
that wealth walk out the door.
Rockefellow gave us more than money that day, although
he did give A.A. a token $1,000. Rockefellow stood up
before the general public, at the risk of being rediculed,
and held up the hand of A.A. to tell the world: These
men have something of great value here. They know what
they are talking about. There is hope at last for the
suffering alcoholics and their loved ones.
Rockefellow seemed to think that a focus on money
would spoil this wonderful thing. In my opinion, this is
what has happened in A.A. today. And fueled by our
trusted servants who are supposed to be guardians of
our traditions, our General Service Board of Trustees.
By violating our tradition of self-support, accepting
that it is ok to use profits from our Book and Literature
Business to support themselves, our public relations has suffered. I believe this is another reason for our
diminished effectiveness. And there is almost no way
to correct the error. The only answer can be found
in concept seven. Close the purse. But if the GSB
decides to accept contributions from outside of the
A.A. membership, they will remain in control. The
control of A.A. will no longer in the hands of our
fellowship. Alcoholics Anonymous will head down the
road of self-destruction. A dead end road; no turning
around. A.A. as we have known it will be done for.
To ANONYMOUS, John D. Rockefeller, Sr. made the money.
His son John D. Rockefeller. Jr. gave much of it away.
The grandson Nelson Rockefeller represented his Dad
at the famous dinner in 1940. John D. Jr. was the
origional source of our tradition seven. He felt that
we ought to remain poor, that money could spoil
this thing. I write just to correct the spelling. Rose
It is difficult to return to a place where you have
never been. Most A.A. members entered A.A. after these
distortions were already in place. The habit of chanting
is hard to break, even when we are aware of how ridiculous
it sounds. Who wants to refuse to "hold hands and pray",
when an attractive hand reaches for yours. ANONYMOUS
Mike, I believe that most of the alcoholics who come
to us for help, sooner or later, leave A.A. We should have
eight million members today. We have just over two
million. We had almost two and a half million members twenty
years ago. We have made a lot of mistakes at the group
level. Thanks for pointing out some of them. Thanks for
relating them to the traditions. Alcoholics Anonymous
from top to bottom has pretty much ignored the traditions
for far too many years. Our tradition of self-support has
been ignored for years. We have grown more dependent on
money from profits of our Book and Literature Business.
The warning about this topic has been removed from our
Service Manual 2011-2012 edition. The warning "In 1986"
on page S74 in previous service manuals has been removed.
But now profits from our Book and Literature business
seems to be drying up. Now is the time to dry it up
completely. Keep trudging along, trying to spread the
word. There are many who will eventually understand and join us, six million of them hopefully. ANONYMOUS
In the A.A Service Manual, pages S72 and 17, Bill writes about a powerful tradition which
is not mentioned in the Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions book. Bill writes that if it
wishes, the General Service Board could elect none but its own Trustees to the positions
of corporate directorships of A.A.W.S and the A.A. Grapevine. Bill writes that a powerful
tradition has grown up to the effect that this NEVER ought to be done.
Bill did not use the word rarely, or seldom. He wrote never. Yet, in the issue
of Box 459 Vol 58, No. 2 Summer 2012 edition 2012, in a report from the Trustees, I see
this was done not once but twice. Two trustees were elected to the position of directors.
These appointments violate this powerful tradition by inviting authoritorian and
institutional operating styles which conflict with A.A. principles. ANONYMOUS
An example given, following that paragraph on page
17 in the Service Manual, attempts to justify the violation of that principle. Instead, the example given, points out
how this Powerful Tradition has been violated.
The footnote at the bottom of page 20 in the Service
Manual points out that the delegates are powerless to stop
or prevent this practice of the General Service Board.
The GSB is electing members of its own Board to paid
positions as directors. Bill wrote that this NEVER
should be done. ANONYMOUS
On page 33 in the same manual concerning the makeup
of the members of the service boards of the A.A.Gravine,Inc.
and A.A. World Services,Inc. it reads: "a part of whom
must always be Trustees". Does this mean that Trustees
are to be unpaid members of the board? Trustees do not
receive a paycheck. Or are these past trustees who are
elected as paid directors. I think these are reasonable
Has the Service Manual always read this way. Or have
these pages been added or altered in the past 25 years?
I don't believe that members of our General Service
Board of Trustees ought to ever give paying jobs to
past Trustees, no matter what their qualifications.
To do so invites authoritarian and institutional
operating styles that conflict with A.A. principles.
If we are paying these Trustees, or past Trustees,
what are their salaries? ANONYMOUS
G.S.O. seeks to follow Concept XI which states. "We believe
that each paid executive, staff member or consultant should
be recompensed in reasonable relation to the value of his
or her similar services or abilities in the commercial world". Shown below are approximate range of salaries
actually paid to G.S.O. employees during 2011. This
information is found in the February 2010 QUARTERLY
REPORT FROM G.S.O.
Listed under the Number of employees is the
approximate ranges of actual G.S.O. salaries. We have 30
Administrative, A.A. Staff, Supervisory, and Exempt Professionals with a salary range of $53,000 to $250,000.
We have 50 Supporting personnel with a salary range
of $33,500 to $70,500. I hope this answers the question
about salaries. Manny Q.
Just some questions about who earns what. Are the directors
paid or do they work for free? How much do we pay them?
How many directors do we have? How many for A.A.W.S.?
How many for the AAGrapevine? If the Grapevine directors
are paid, where does that money come from, from donations
or from Grapevine subscription sales?
Ought we be paying a quarter of a million dollars
annually to any executive? Can we afford these salaries
in addition to Payroll taxes, insurance, and Retirement
This information ought to be made available to all
of our membership. I feel that we have the capability
to fund all expenses if they are necessary. But we
need total transparency from our General Service
Board of Trustees, and all others who are serving us.
A correction in the previous message: The info is from the February 2012 QUARTERLY REPORT FROM G.S.O., NOT 2010.
The high end salary for 2011 was $225,000. Who got the
$25,000 raise? Or was the salary range raised? ANONYMOUS
AAWS and AAGV have only one paid director on each corporate board, the General Manager for AAWS and the Executive Editor for the AAGV.
Is that two paid workers or Four? Are the General
Manager for AAWS and the Executive Editor for the
AAGV directors? Are they (two or four?) earning a
quarter million dollars annually? How many others on the
payroll are earning over $100,000? Manny Q.
According to the 2010-2011 edition of our service
manual, Page 21, currently A.A.W.S has nine directors,
of which four are trustees. Currently we have eight
directors for the AAGV. Do these directors work
without compensation? What is the salary of our
top ten paid employees? What are these positions?
In 2011 we paid $5,405,862 in salaries. That did not include payroll taxes $408,621; insurance $983,027;
and retirement expenses of $1,832,125, totaling
$8,629,635. That is $2,365,181 more than contributions
received from the membership. This is just for salaries
and benefits. I feel this is beyond extravagant. Our
membership has been stagnant for 20 years, but our
headquarters has kept expanding.
Some of my friends say that I just do not understand
the important job our leaders are doing, the scope of
their work. I see the product of what they accomplish, or
the lack of it: A dismal 15,000 additional members a
year. And that work is done at the local level. What
do our top paid employees do to earn over $200,000
annual salary? ANONYMOUS
Why was the paragraph on page S74 of the Service
Manual beginning with, In 1986, dropped in the 2011-2012
edition. Have we moved so far away from being self-
supporting, that we are going to forget our Seventh
Tradition. We are already violating this vital
principle by using profits from our Book and literature
business to run GSO. What is our next step? Are we
going to accept gifts from friends of A.A., because
we desperately need money?
Sure, money would start rolling in, and GSO
could continue as is for a few more years. We must
never let this happen. We are already treading on dangerous
ground by using profits from our Book and literature business, to run GSO. Much of this income comes
from sources outside of A.A. Too much. Any amount
is too much. Just because we have been doing this
for years doesn't make it any less dangerous. The
effects from ignoring Tradition Seven is already
affecting A.A. as related to our public relations.(in my opinion).
Bill wrote on page 180 in the 12 + 12: quote "Therefore a
great responsibility fell upon us to develop the BEST
possible public relations policy for Alcoholics
Anonymous." end quote. We want to be as atractive as we possiply can be. What will A.A. be like 25 or 50
years from now? We ARE responsible for A.A.'s future.
God help us to be responsible. ANONYMOUS
Could that possibly mean that a man or woman who is or has
been a trustee, ought to forfeit the posibility of ever
applying for, or ever accepting a paid job in the AA
structure? Bill W. wrote that it never should be done. How many times in our history has this Powerful tradition been broken? ANONYMOUS
I have an AA friend who runs a small printing business. He stated that he uses profit from
the printing and sale of his product to enhance his overall business. He says that
Alcoholics Anonymous' A.A.W.S. ought to be allowed to do the same thing. After all, the profit
is being put to good use: to help the Alcoholic who still suffers. My friend has 10 years sobriety.
There are few of us left today who understand the danger in this practice. This is mentioned on page 74 in the 2009-2010 copy of our A.A. Service Manual. This relates to our Public
Relations Policy. We no longer have a hand out to anyone financially. We are self-supporting
through contributions from our own members and our groups. That has been our goal for about
70 years. Isn't it time to start moving toward that goal, instead of further away from it?
The corrections need to be made now, while there a few of us remaining who understand the
meaning of being fully self-supporting using only money from our own members and groups.
Whatever sacrifices needed must be addressed and made. ANONYMOUS
Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our traditions, ever reminding us to place principals before personalities
The opening sentence in the 12x12 states, “The spiritual substance of anonymity is sacrifice.” Then on page 187 it states,” The promoter instinct in us might be our undoing. If even one publicly got drunk, or was lured into using AA’s name for his own purposes, the damage might be irreparable. At this altitude (press, radio, films, and television), anonymity-100% anonymity-was the only possible answer. Here, principles would have to come before personalities without exception.
I have heard that phrase hundreds of times taken out of context. When I read it here, my interpretation is that I have to place AA’s principle of anonymity before MY personality.
On page 185, Bill talks about confidences being broken within AA. He says, “Clearly, every AA member’s name-and story, too-had to be confidential, if he wished.” This tells me if I want to share parts of someone else’s story, I need to get their permission first. I know from experience that I am far better off sticking to my own story.
There is a lot more that could be said about tradition 12. This is just what comes to mind this morning at my stage of development.
Thanks for reading,
Tradition Twelve in the 12 + 12 concludes: We are sure
that HUMILITY, expressed by anonymity, is the greatest
safeguard that Alcoholics Anonymous can ever have. How
humble are we today? Really? ANONYMOUS
At our morning monthly group conscience/business meeting, a newer member stated that she
had a contact at one of the local coffee establishments, and has been offered free coffee for
our group. Of course the offer is appreciated, but in no way can we accept contributions from
outside sources. I was dismayed at the number of members, some with long term sobriety, who
felt that we ought to accept the offer. Our group is not exactly poor, but even if it were,
we cannot accept outside contributions from anyone. Only from AA members and even then, there
are restrictions. We did, as a group, vote to increase our rent to the entity which allows us
meeting space. But we must never accept outside contributions even when they are offerred. ANONYMOUS
I,too,am often amazed at the lack of knowledge shown by long-time members. Even at my District meeting,knowledge of the Traditions is scant. I think every District meeting should have a 1/2 hour Traditions Study meeting for those that wish to perform their service in the best way.
Most of our A.A. membership today are somewhat familiar
with the traditions and steps. We know enough to protest
when changes are attempted. An example was the recommendation that the second A in A.A. be dropped. Many
of us are aware of the spiritual significance of anonymity.
Few members are aware of the changes made in the
concepts and in the service manual. Since 1962 the Service
manual has seen several changes and was revised in 1999.
The Prudent Reserve Fund, which Bill W. created has
been changed drastically. Bill wanted at least two to three years of operating expenses to be the eventual reserve.
This was to insure the operation of GSO in any event which
could happen, such as the groups not making contributions.
This discription of the Reserve Fund has been changed
significantly. Today it reads that if the Fund ever goes
above one year's expenses, we are to wait another year, and if it remains above a years worth of expenses we are to
look for ways to spend the money. Two-three months' reserve
would fit the revised requirement. That is insane! Bill
called the reserve of 6-9 months dangerous. It is written
in The Language of The Heart. I don't have the book in
front of me. I think Bill called nine months reserve dangerous. Of course all changes were made with the
approval of the General Service Conference. If we are
going to preserve the integrity of our fellowship,
our leadership must learn the traditions and the
concepts in their origional true meaning. ANONYMOUS
The 12&12, Big Book is my guilding light. My HP has directed me to a new calling. I am now 62 yrs & 33yrs sober. I have done much traveling on this Earth and found the A'A hand to to be there for me. I have recently semi-retired and moved to the Philippines. The hand was not reaching back to me. I finaly found our brothers & sisters in Cebu at the 30th convention last February 212. I was able to meet my new A'A friends from other providences and city's. At that point I took charge of a situation to build on my foundation, raising my hand to bid on next years 31st A'A convention in CAGAY DE ORO CITY, PROVIDENCE MANDINIO PHILIPPINES. We won the bid. My new A'A Cagay de Oro friends where in shock but very happy that I had taken the opportunity to be part of a whole. UNITY-SERVICE-RECOVER. These to city's are very far apart in distance. CDO members all united that day. It was the Traditions working at its best. Most Philippine members do not have much guildeness about the traditions or the 12 concepts. Since that day in February 2012 we have grown greatly. We are now in the process of reorganizing all the groups and making a meeting list, electing people, (GSR'S)coffee maker, and so forth. A GSO is in the planning along with the Committee meeting for the Convention. I am now today in the Boston area organizing and planning for lititure and other needs to forefull our Unitfied groups. I write this experience because I of resent had become like "stale bread" I don't feel like there are challenges available to me like there was in the early years of soberness here in the USA. Moral of this story,experiences; Pick a country or place that has not had the opportunities to grow and matrue like we have here in the USA. WE ARE RESPONSIBLE' ANYTIME ANYWHERE. GOD BLESS OUR FELLOWSHIP.
I also travel the earth & find isolated English/foreign groups sometimes sadly unproductive.Tho the group in Playa Del Carmen,Mexico has a Tradition Meeting which is more than I can say for central Corrupticut.
“Our public relations policy is based on attraction rather than promotion; we need always maintain personal anonymity at the level of press, radio, and films.”
As I read over tradition 11 in the 12 x12, a few lines stand out to me today. As usual, they are different from the last time I read this tradition. To this day I am still amazed how the 12x12 and the big book seem to change with me over the years. This is further proof to me that I am constantly learning and changing as I grow.
Here are the passages that stand out to me today:
“Therefore, a great responsibility fell upon us to develop the best possible public relations policy for AA.” I had to chuckle when reading this! How could an anonymous society have any other policy? If we did it any other way we surely couldn’t call ourselves anonymous.
“But we do have to soberly face the fact that being in the public eye is hazardous, especially for us…….we knew we had to exercise self-restraint.” Imagine that! Alcoholics exercising self-restraint! As I understand AA’s steps and traditions, I believe them to be ego-deflating. I feel that is why being in the public eye is so hazardous to me, it inflates my ego. Now this only pertains to my personal anonymity in regards to being a member of AA. If I am a movie actor or news reporter that doesn’t mean I have to quit my job. I should continue my occupation. I just ought not publicly say I am a member of AA. I can talk openly of my alcoholism all I want for whatever reason I personally choose as long as I refrain from stating I am so and so and I am a member of AA.
“Here was something rare in the world-a society which said it wished to publicize its principles and its work, but not its individual members.” To this day I think this is incredible. What a display of humility and spirituality!
“This Tradition is a constant and practical reminder that personal ambition has no place in AA. In it, each member becomes an active guardian of our Fellowship.” WOW! What a phrase. “Personal ambition has no place in AA,” just what I need, another way to measure my humility.
In this day and age it is easy to see who has not followed this tradition. All you have to do is log on to your favorite search engine with a name and AA to see. I don’t know how much our fellowship has suffered from members not following trad 11. I think the real suffering comes to those who actually break their own anonymity. I have read about them in the news or watched them on tv when they are doing great. Then something happens. I guess their ego inflates over time from being so important and then I read about them being drunk or dead somewhere.
I know there is more to tradition 11 that the short paragraphs written here. This is just what stands out to me today.
Thanks for reading,
Yes, Bill writes on 180, in the 12&12: Therefore, a great responsibility
fell upon us to develop the best possible public relations
policy for Alcoholics Anonymous. I see no reason to chuckle.
There was a time when our public image was "better than
our actual character". Hardly anyone directed any criticism
toward AA. Is that true today? How attractive are we today, really? How does the general public view Alcoholics Anonymous? Anyone with a computer can find the answer to that question. And it is not pretty. We are viewed today by much of the general public as some kind of strange
religious cult. An A&E video, INSIDE ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS
produced for public television in 1999, used that description. True, even as a strange religious cult, AA works for a few. Bill W. and Dr. Silkworth left us a solution (method) which worked for the masses, until the
AA member's pride and EGO took control and almost ruined it. There is still time to turn the tide. ANONYMOUS
Perhaps the best "public relation" policy would be"no public relations" in today"s world AA is well known & easily found.
AA has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy.
In the 12 x 12 it talks about the Washingtonian movement. How they almost found an answer to alcoholism. Then they publicly took sides on abolition and temperance. If the Washingtonians had stuck to a primary purpose and stayed out of public controversy, I probably would be calling myself a member or that movement rather than AA.
It also talks in the 12x12 how we squabble over different issues in AA. When done in the privacy of our group conscience with everyone having the best for AA in mind, it has little ill effect except maybe some sulking group elders who after over managing a group watched the newer members start a group more to their liking.
The 12 x 12 was first printed in 1953. I don’t think our founders could have imagined that our little squabbles over this or that would be in print and posted on a web site that could be accessed by anyone with a cell phone or access to a public library computer. I have a feeling that our “inside” issues may be drawn into public controversy through our “public” discussions of our internal growing pains. I think the complaints posted on the internet would be better served discussed at a group conscience, then taken to district and area meetings, and finally to the general service conference.
AA is self - correcting. The individual members who don’t conform to the AA program general eventually drink or die, that’s just how it is. The AA groups that don’t practice the program of AA and follow the traditions of AA usually die as well. At least this is what I have witnessed over the years.
So I have learned if I don’t like something that is going on in AA, to take it to pray about it, inventory it, talk to my sponsor about it, then bring it to our group conscience, then let the democratic process take over.
Thanks for reading
You are entitled to your view, Corey, but I don't agree. At least in my area, getting involved in the general service process means spending many years with others already involved in the general service process. By the time one reaches delegate in my area, all of the rough edges have been worn off and the person is pretty much in the mold of "if it ain't broke don't fix it."
Also, it's troubling to me that the general service process effectively minimizes the voice of the local intergroup associations and committees, which I believe are the true front lines of AA.
And Bill's allocation of delegates gives undo voice to groups in rural areas.
And the fellowship's decision to make AA members a supermajority of General Service Board limits another potential source of helpful feedback from friends of AA.
As a result of the limited views represented, I think it has been extremely difficult for AA to take an honest look at itself. We are good at debating commas in the Big Book, but have never properly addressed more difficult issues, in my view.