The Brave New Mensa
will be one in which:

1. Mensans no longer meet in each others' homes, eating food prepared by the host
2. Mensans can no longer offer rides to each other to attend meetings
3. Mensans can no longer take full advantage of SIGHT
4. Mensans no longer have to self-regulate themselves with respect to alcohol, fattening foods, potentially dangerous activities, etc.
5. Regional Gatherings (RGs) can no longer provide welcoming Hospitality suites with volunteer-produced food
6. Mensans contemplate ways to sue each other (via the national organization) rather than devote themselves to having fun at events

Mensa is essentially a social organization. The primary reason we exist as a group is to socialize with one another. We do not, for instance, serve hard alcohol at the smaller RGs; we provide beer and wine. It is self-serve, and the only "regulating" we do is watch for underage Mensans trying to sneak a buzz. We are in neither the business of food service nor that of beverage service: We host a large party that our Mensa friends attend voluntarily, and the party is conducted by volunteer help. Everyone attending understands we are volunteering to host a party for about 100 people or so, and no one expects it to be a professionally run, five-star restaurant with a Cordon Bleu chef.

If the volunteers themselves are prevented from providing the food at RGs, then another risk point might also be removed. One year I accidentally spilled several quarts of very hot clam chowder in my shoes — with my feet in them. I learned two things: that it is possible to jump backward out of my shoes and that I can move really fast when appropriately motivated. It never even occurred to me to ask the local chapter to replace my ruined shoes. Instead I bought another pair, quickly, so I would not be working in the Hospitality suite barefoot; I know that much about food service — I can cook in my own kitchen sans shoes but I have to be shod in public. Whenever problems, serious or otherwise, arise, our RG volunteers have jumped into the breach and rectified the situation immediately. This is the essence of volunteering and of being involved in a volunteer group: an acceptance of mistakes and a willingness to help fix them — rather than a readiness to "cause jump" and "blame jump."

If the National Office would like to publish, as a handbook or guideline, material in which the current wisdom is presented on maintaining a "safe" food environment, then AML (American Mensa, Ltd.) will be taking a responsibility of maintaining the guideline, ensuring that all RG Hospitality Chairs get a new copy for each RG and that the material stays current; otherwise, AML will create a new risk for itself. If the local group's RG Hospitality Chair is tasked with providing self-education, that is fine — but how will that be regulated? The AMC (American Mensa Committee) could require a "certified" food handler to take responsibility for the Hospitality Suite; certainly someone within a local group is a restaurateur. Moving the risk from Mensa and the local chapter to some individual whose livelihood depends upon that certification would certainly lower the risk to Mensa, because no individual qualified for Mensa would be so credulous. I've seen lawyers in groups refuse to be the group's legal advisor because, while agreeing to serve would effectively remove risk from the local group, all the risk would become the member lawyer's. Has the AMC so eaten of the (unwashed) fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil that they cannot leave well enough alone?

"Risk management" is a big buzzword in industry. Many of us work in industries that require us to know about risk management — "building the grid," "using the past to predict the future," and so forth. Mensa dues paid for the Mensa risk management survey, and the membership should have a voice in any discussion of changing Mensa in response to the survey. Why not allow an open discussion to help determine how the risk management points that need the most attention should be addressed?

First, however, one has to ask: Are the members of Mensa going to events to look for ways in which to sue Mensa? Or are we still an organization wanting to provide a social forum to those who meet the criterion for membership?

Looking at discussion point #81¹ in the Minutes of the July 2004 AMC meeting, I see the AMC is suggesting that the risk for food handling at RGs and the provisioning of alcohol at RGs be shifted to individuals who volunteer to do the work, absolving Mensa of any blame. This current discussion speaks only of "Major Mensa events." However, a few years ago, much similar discussion went on about the definition of a Mensa event.

It was finally determined that a Mensa event is one in which the "business" of Mensa in general or of a local chapter of Mensa was conducted. The original reason for specifically excluding non-business events was that folks wanted to retain the right to refuse hospitality to specific members; and no member of Mensa can be barred from an "official" Mensa meeting. Further, RGs were not included as official "Mensa functions" because tickets are sold and anyone can purchase one — business is not, generally, conducted at RGs. Now, it appears that any event in which the word "Mensa" is used is "a Mensa event."

Discussion point #82² from the same Minutes is equally disconcerting. This discussion about stifling any sort of ride sharing while "encouraging" the usage of public transportation to and from Mensa events could result in eliminating SIGHT as a meaningful benefit and dilute the RG experience. Often the SIGHT coordinator will pick up a guest at the airport or help set up ride sharing to events off-site at RGs. Several of the RGs I attend have "a night on the town." I pay attention to the person driving any car in which I ride; it is my decision to go or not. Is the AMC Chair insinuating that I'm not competent to make that decision? In the event of a car accident, if suing were necessary, I'd sue the "at fault" driver. Suing the person at fault makes more sense than suing Mensa. At work, I occasionally drive company-owned cars. The company pays for me to take a driver safety course. Are we going to require the same sort of courses for anyone who volunteers to drive at an RG, or for SIGHT, or for any other function?

We recently had a problem in which a volunteer mistook volunteering for employment. The reaction of the AMC to the risk management report gives credence to this erroneous point of view and might even aggravate some already bad circumstances. If volunteers are going to be deemed more like employees and less like volunteers in order to offset the risk to Mensa in general, then it would certainly hold that the local chapters will have to start paying the volunteers. They'll have to be compensated; we can't ask them to swallow the added expenses of required certifications, time spent in acquiring those certifications, etc.

Let us institute a different regulation: Each attendee signs an agreement to assume risk when attending events hosted by volunteers. When a person enters the home of another and accepts the hospitality of the host, there is an assumption of risk on the part of both parties, regardless of any mention of Mensa. A knee-jerk reaction is not an appropriate reaction to anything, especially not risk management.

Before AMC makes any more decisions, perhaps the membership should be allowed to see two things:

1. The risk management survey
2. The actual suits brought against Mensa by Mensans, and how those suits were handled

Then we would be able to make informed decisions about whether we wanted to further regulate ourselves.

— Clara Woodall

1. 81. Serving alcohol and home-cooked food at Mensa events BECKER Discussion of risk management concerns and what we can do to lessen the risk to AML, local groups, and SIGs.

DISCUSSION: BECKER said we need policy and member education. COONTZ pointed out things that have been done on the food safety issue: Ray O'Connor taught a course at this AG on food safety: RVCs giving LDWs are encouraged to offer a Food Safety Course; forms for approval being revised asking if and when the Hospitality Chair has had a food safety course. In addition, the committee is working on a self-study food safety course. This should be ready to be proposed to the AMC in September. Consideration is being given to requiring certification of hospitality chairs and workers at the major Mensa events. Discussion continued, with some expressing concern about over regulation. BRUCE said that the Health Dept. has put on a presentation in food handling safety at his region's LDW. Serving alcohol at events and the risk inherent was also discussed. SEIGLER said he favors having the hotel serve the alcohol, which is happening at this AG, but it is prohibitively expensive for smaller gatherings. Most every state has dram shop laws. If you know that a person is intoxicated and you continue to serve them alcohol you are liable for any injuries that occur. We need to make a policy that states that you do not serve alcohol to people who are intoxicated.

BECKER said that the Risk Management Committee will be asked to come up with some recommendations regarding policy for serving alcohol for the September AMC meeting.

2. 82. Ride-sharing and Transportation BECKER Discussion of risk management concerns and what we can do to lessen the risk to AML, local groups, and SIGs.

DISCUSSION: BECKER said that it was brought to our attention that this is the leading cause of claims against non-profits; there is currently no committee or person following up that portion of the Risk Management report. MCBEAN notes that she has given public transportation information in her column. In her region, ride sharing is not common. BECKER said that there are two areas here: one is for Mensa-owned vehicles, and we are well covered on that. The other area is using volunteer private transportation. Donahoo pointed out that this too involves educating our membership: transfer the risk if possible; hire a bus company; don't use members' vans and cars. REMINE said we should ban any mention of ride sharing in local publications — anything where Mensa officially encourages ride sharing. Advertising ride sharing in a Mensa newsletter is like AG roommate matching; it becomes a Mensa organized activity. RAINEY said it may be more pervasive than we think; any RG or AG that he has attended has had some sort of ride-sharing encouraged and offered. Discussion continued on just how to protect Mensa and still provide service in this area. SEIGLER said if we have more than minimum contact to arrange rides. SOPER pointed out that with SIGHT, we match other members with other members, and they might go pick them up at the airport and take them to a host's house, and eat their food, and drink their alcohol. BECKER agreed these are not easy questions. COONTZ and her committee will continue to study these issues and make recommendations.