Saturday, 26 November 2016

HAN groups - Home Delivery Business (Non-store business)

Home Delivery Business (Non-store business)



Development of non-store business

Co-op's home delivery business is a group buying system using the HAN groups. HAN is a Japanese word literally means group. Only members who have registered as HAN members can utilize this facility. Roughly 46% of co-op sales come from a co-op group buying system.
How it works:
A group of five to seven households from a neighborhood, which is called "a HAN group", orders products together to be delivered directly to the group. The system is especially popular with mothers of young children and households who live near the local co-op stores. The group buying system saves co-op members time and money by enabling them to shop at home. Further, household budgeting becomes easier and impulsive shopping is kept to a minimum since members must plan their purchases ahead of time. Best of all, HAN groups can enjoy the convenience of weekly home deliveries of fresh food and groceries.
This type of business was established in the 1970s and member's used Han to voice out their opinions to Co-op, which in turn improved operations and boosted business. There are several factors that enabled co-ops to create this model that are historical, socio-economic, institutional and organizational in nature.

Home delivery classified into three:

Group buying

We deliver ordered products to a group of more than three members



Mechanism of Co-op group buying

Individual buying

Individual Delivery Services now surpasses Joint Home Delivery Services in terms of the number of members utilizing these services

NAKAYOSHI (Friends) delivery service

We deliver two members' ordered products to one place
For further more explanation:
In the group buying system, each member of a HAN group individually selects goods from the distributed catalog. In the typical co-ops, a HAN group is formed from a neighborhood and they write the codes of goods on a OCR sheet for ordering. The leader of a HAN collects the OCR sheets of members in his/her group and sends them to co-ops.

One week later, the ordered products are delivered to the HAN. Although co-ops accepted cash in the past, the most recent preferred payment method for group buying is through automatic bank transfers.

Cooperative Economics in Brazil

Cooperative Economics in Brazil

The UNISOL Cooperative Network

On June 25, 2015 I visited a cooperative network in Sao Paulo, Brazil. It is named Unisol, which stands for Union of Cooperatives and Solidarity Enterprises. Unisol was an offshoot of the labor union movement and progressive political movement. It was started by the metal workers’ union of the Labor Party (PT). The metal workers’ union is also a member of the Central Union of Workers, which is akin to our American Federation of Labor (for more information, see here)
Unisol is on the Italian model of large cooperative leagues associated with political parties. LEGA co-op was affiliated with the Italian Communist Party. These are wholly different systems/models than American populist co-ops that form individually through local organizing efforts. The Brazilian and Italian cooperative model/system is much more political, class-based, and class-oriented than the American system/model. The PT and the metal workers’ union opposed the national dictatorship in the 1980s. The Metal Workers’ Union and PT studied liberation theology as well as psychology of liberation. Today, this union (which I visited) has political education for workers. An exposition of posters about the dictatorship adorns the entrance lobby. The politics of  the PT is an important influence on the cooperative politics of Unisol, and it may have both positive and negative aspects.
Tying all of this together is the figure of Lula, the recent President of Brazil from 2003-2011. Lula was the president of the metal workers’ union that formed Unisol. He was also the leader of the PT. And he helped found the national workers’ union, CUT. In 1996 he visited Italy to study co-ops. He introduced the Italian labor constitution to the Metal Workers’ Union which subsequently visited Emilia Romagna region of Italian co-ops. Lula also introduced the Italian labor constitution into Brazilian national legislation.
The 1999 economic crisis led to recovering bankrupt companies. This was abetted by the Brazilian government that has an agency for the solidarity economy. (The government’s relation to this economy is contradictory, for it is also beholden to corporate interests that undermine cooperatives. One example of this is the fact that the government has privatized many government jobs, replacing them with contracted employees of private employment agencies.) This agency was abetted by the labor party (PT) and the Central Union of Workers. All three institutions encouraged employees of bankrupt companies to turn them into cooperatives. This is the political, class basis and orientation of Brazilian cooperatives. There are numerous co-ops that were not developed through conversion.
Chronologically, in the year 2000, Unisol organized from these recovered enterprises. Organizers studied Mondragon and Italian co-ops. In 2002, Unisol Sao Paulo formed, and in 2004 it expanded nationwide as Unisol Brazil.
Currently, Unisol includes 25 recovered factories, in addition to 800 formalized co-ops in total, 7 million members, and 70,000 employees. Unisol includes consumer co-ops which joined after Unisol began from workers of bankrupt companies. Interestingly, worker co-ops comprise the bulk of Unisol co-ops, with consumer co-ops comprising a minority. The reverse is the case in the United States where worker co-ops comprise only 10% of all co-ops.
Unisol is not the only co-op association in Brazil. Many co-ops are outside Unisol. More co-ops are not in Unisol than inside. Brazil has many capitalist-style producer co-ops. These include agribusiness co-ops. They operate like their counterparts in the U.S. (Ratner, 2015, chap. 1).
Member co-ops elect a general council that elects 13 executive directors.
Unisol covers diverse sectors: farming, restaurants, bakeries, bees, agriculture, handicraft, social, construction, orchards, metallurgy, recycling, tourism.
Unisol is a member of the International Cooperative Alliance. The President of Unisol is on ICA. Given its political, working class origins, Unisol opposes political neutrality of the International Cooperative Alliance. It is also critical of ICA’s association with capitalist institutions -- that parallels the National Cooperative Business Association’s close association with capitalist co-ops, corporations, and government agencies (Ratner, 2015, chap. 1).
Unisol has an educational relationship with Mondragon in which they share educational materials.
Most Unisol-associated co-op employees are members of the Central Workers’ Union (CUT). This is the same Union that represents industrial workers in corporations. Membership was formerly required; now it is voluntary.

Recycling Garbage Co-op

This was a touching example of the value of cooperatives. The member-owners were former individual garbage pickers combing vast garbage piles for recyclable and saleable items that they sold in a hand-to-mouth existence. The local government in a suburb of Sao Paulo allocated funds to establish a recycling co-op composed of these poor garbage pickers. The government provided a building and equipment. It provided government personnel to supervise the co-op. The city government made an agreement with this co-op. The city sends its city trash to the co-op, and the co-op processes it, sorts it and sells to industries. The co-op uses the income to pay wages and pension benefits to a fund that the city administers. Retirees will collect pensions from the city, not the co-op.
It was moving to see these former garbage-scroungers working collectively in decent conditions and earning a decent wage. They all attend monthly general meetings to discuss issues related to the enterprise. This includes personnel issues. The member-owners are obviously much better off than they were as independent, individual scroungers.
Working conditions are quite rudimentary. About 30 members stand on an assembly line as trash is brought down it, and they manually sort the trash into plastics, metal, paper, etc. for recycling.
Recently, the market price for these recycled items has dropped, and a number of members quit the co-op to look for higher paid work elsewhere.
It is important to emphasize that this co-op was initiated by the city government. The mayor had been the President of the national labor union (CUT), and he used his working class orientation to work with Unisol to form this recycling co-op. The garbage pickers did not form this co-op. The government provides the equipment, the plant, and the trash for the co-op members to use. The government also handles the pensions for the members.

Uniforja Metallurgy Workers’ Co-op

Uniforja is the largest co-op in Unisol. It was recovered from family owners who went bankrupt. Metal workers union – under the leadership of Lula – encouraged the workers to buy it. Lula came to the factory to mediate between workers and family. The family hadn’t paid wages for two years. They finally agreed to give workers some machinery to replace the lost wages.

Workers borrowed the balance of the sale price from the bank. They paid the family the agreed upon price. The workers converted it to a co-op.
Uniforja is a small industrial co-op consisting of 300 member-owners. It has a large foundry that heats and shapes metal parts. Workers work in assembly line-style where the molten steel is moved from one person to another, using hand tongs to move and process the metal on the assembly line. They are currently making the metal for windmills that are used to generate electricity. They get contracts to produce different metal products for diverse buyers.
Uniforja has a typical co-op structure. The members compose a general assembly that elects a board of directors.

Contradictions in Uniforja Co-op

To protect themselves against the vicissitudes of a contracting economy, the 300 worker-owner-members employ 150 contract workers. When demand for metal products drops, these employees are summarily fired. They have no rights or benefits, they do not elect their managers, they do not participate in decision-making councils, and they are paid market wages which are one-half of the wages that the member-workers pay themselves.
This introduces elements of capitalism into the cooperative. The member-workers are simultaneously employers of contract workers who:
  1. produce surplus value for the members through low wages
  2. are instrumentalized as disposable cannon fodder for economic downturns
  3. have work conditions imposed on them by the owner-members    
The cooperative spirit that cooperators tout does not extend to these contract workers in the co-op. It is disingenuous to claim that co-ops do not fire their employees during economic recessions when they fire contract workers who work alongside them.
This two-tiered system of workers is employed by Mondragon and numerous other cooperatives throughout the world (e.g., in China’s village co-ops). Two-thirds of Mondragon’s 83,000 employees are non-members, and one half of its 256 companies are not cooperatives.
The spokesman for Uniforja also told me about another contradiction in the co-op. The members want to take profit in individual distributions for their personal use rather than reinvest it. This makes it difficult to purchase state of the art technology; and this makes it difficult for the co-op to compete with capitalist firms. (Capitalists have no difficulty reinvesting their profits because they take them from workers by force!)
(It is important to note that neither of these contradictions violates the ICA’s 7 co-op principles. Co-ops are defined as meeting member needs through democratic discussion by members. If member-owners decide to hire contract workers or take earned profit in the form of individual distributions that is fine under principle #3 of the Principles.)
A third contradiction that plagues Unisol co-ops is the depoliticizing of work that is political. Especially younger co-op members have little interest in the political foundation of Unisol cooperatives and the political nature of work. They are not involved in Liberation Theology or Liberation Psychology, labor history, or political struggle for co-op-friendly and labor-friendly government that were so important for founding Unisol and the recovered (expropriated) enterprises. Current co-op members are more narrowly focused on technical, organizational issues of the workplace – scheduling work, remuneration, assemblies, discipline problems.
They are not concerned with broader labor issues and political issues of political parties. Yet these directly impact the quality of work, the standard of living, and the economic rights of co-op member-owner-workers. Co-op members feel the impact of these central issues – neoliberalism -- however, they do not understand or exercise control over them.
These contradictions in co-ops reflect the profound corruption by capitalism of alternative social movements. I argue  that this contradiction can only be solved through developing a socialist politics of cooperation (The website of the national forum FBES hosts an excellent dissertation that helps understand how SENAES, and FBES, in addition to Unisol, operate) These contradictions in co-ops reflect the profound corruption by capitalism of alternative social movements. I argue (2015) that this contradiction can only be solved through developing a socialist politics of cooperation. This would consist of thoroughly analyzing capitalism to understand its myriad, variegated, disguised forms that alienate people surreptitiously. This thorough, ongoing critique would be reflexively applied to the behavior of cooperators in order to identify and counteract the kind of contradictions that appear in the Uniforia cooperataors. Socialist politics of cooperation would also identify shortcomings of ICA’s seven cooperative principles that enable Uniforja’s contradictions to qualify as cooperative.
For example, Principle #3 states: “Members allocate surpluses for any or all of the following purposes: developing their co-operative, possibly by setting up reserves, part of which at least would be indivisible; benefiting members in proportion to their transactions with the co-operative; and supporting other activities approved by the membership.” This is extremely ambiguous, as the undnerlined words indicate. Reserves are only a possible action, not necessary. Moreover, an undefined part of possible reserves could be indivisible. This allows for a miniscule collective reserve to qualify as cooperative. And, if members so choose, they can use reserves not for common benefits but to benefit members individually according to their participation. And, members can decide any other way of disposing of surpluses.
These ambiguities, plus allowances for individualistic distribution of surpluses, provide no guidance for genuine cooperation. They enable cooperators to enact all of the contradictions that appear in Uniforja, and still qualify as cooperators. It is difficult for cooperators to avoid these contradictions if they are enabled, or allowed, by the very principles that define cooperation. There is nothing in cooperative principles that excludes hiring contract workers and treating them as such. There is no provision that participants in co-ops must be co-op members. Socialist politics of cooperation would reveal these shortcomings in cooperative principles and stipulate more specific and thorough-going collectivization (see Ratner, 2015). For instance, socialist politics of cooperation would advocate moving away from wage labor that is alienating. This would mitigate against hiring contract workers and disposing of them. Another cause of contradictions in Uniforjia may be the compromising politics of the Workers’ Party. These politics may have influenced the cooperative politics of Unisol cooperatives, which culminates in some of the neoliberal, individualistic actions by cooperators. This is an important topic to research. It  would be inspired by a socialist politics that critiques neoliberal practices within social organizations.

History of Credit co-op society in India

History of Credit co-op society in India


The Rochdale Pioneers
Co-operatives started out as small grass roots organizations in Western Europe, North America and Japan in the middle of the last century, however, the it is the Rochdale Pioneers that is regarded as the prototype of the modern co-operative society and the founders of the Co-operative Movement.
In 1844 a group of 28 artisans working in the cotton mills in the town of Rochdale, in the north of England established the first modern co-operative business, the Rochdale Equitable Pioneers Society (photo). The weavers faced miserable working conditions and low wages, and they could not afford the high prices of food and household goods. They decided that by pooling their scarce resources and working together they could access basic goods at a lower price. Initially, there were only four items for sale: flour, oatmeal, sugar and butter. The Pioneers decided it was time shoppers were treated with honesty, openness and respect, that they should be able to share in the profits that their custom contributed to and that they should have a democratic
The Cooperative Movement in India

1. Preamble
The history of cooperatives in India is more than a hundred years old. The canvas of events is far too vast to give it the space it deserves in a Report of this nature. The following is only a brief attempt to recapture the major events that led to the cooperatives as we see them today.

2. Background

Even before formal cooperative structures came into being through the passing of a law, the practice of the concept of cooperation and cooperative activities were prevalent in several parts of India. Village communities collectively creating permanent assets like village tanks or village forests called Devarai or Vanarai was fairly common. Similarly, instances of pooling of resources by groups, like food grains after harvest to lend to needy members of the group before the next harvest, or collecting small contributions in cash at regular intervals to lend to members of the group viz., Chit Funds, in the erstwhile Madras Presidency, “Kuries” in Travancore, “Bhishies” in Kolhapur etc. were to be found. The “Phads” of Kolhapur where farmers impounded water by putting up bunds and agreed to ensure equitable distribution of water, as well as harvesting and transporting of produce of members to the market, and the “Lanas” which were yearly partnerships of peasants to cultivate jointly, and distribute the harvested produce in proportion to the labor and bullock power contributed by their partners, were similar instances of cooperation.
The proposal for agricultural banks was first mooted in 1858 and again in 1881 by Mr.William Wedderburn the District Judge of Ahmednagar, in consultation with Justice M.G. Ranade, but was not accepted. In March 1892, Mr. Frederick Nicholson was placed by the Governor of Madras Presi­dency (for inquiring into the possibility) of introducing in this Presidency, a system of agricultural or other land banks and submitted his report in two volumes in 1895 and 1897.
In 1901 the Famine Commission recommended the establishment of Rural Agricultural Banks through the establishment of Mutual Credit Associations, and such steps as were taken by the Government of North Western provinces and Oudh. The underlying idea of a number of persons combining together was the voluntary creation of a new and valuable security. A strong association competent to offer guarantees and advantages of lending to groups instead of individu­als were major advantages. The Commission also suggested the principles underlying Agricultural Banks.

3. Cooperative Credit Societies Act, 1904 - The First Incorporation

Taking cognizance of these developments and to provide a legal basis for cooperative societies, the Edward Law Committee with Mr. Nicholson as one of the members was appointed by the Government to examine and recommend a course of action. The Cooperative Societies Bill, based on the recommendations of this Committee, was enacted on 25th March, 1904. As its name suggests, the Cooperative Credit Societies Act was restricted to credit cooperatives. By 1911, there were 5,300 societies in existence with a membership of over 3 lakes. The first few coopera­tive societies registered in India under the 1904 Act in the first 5-6 years are as follows: Rajahauli Village Bank, Jorhat, Jorhat Cooperative Town Bank and Charigaon Village Bank, Jorhat, Assam (1904), Tirur Primary Agricultural Cooperative Bank Ltd., Tamil Nadu (1904), Agriculture Service Cooperative Society Ltd., Devgaon, Piparia, MP (1905), Bains Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., Punjab (1905), Bilipada Service Cooperative Society Ltd., Orissa (1905), Government of India, Sectt. Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society (1905), Kanginhal Vyvasaya Seva Sahakari Bank Ltd., Karnataka (1905), Kasabe Tadvale Cooperative Multi-Purpose Society, Maharashtra (1905), Premier Urban Credit Society of Calcutta, West Bengal (1905), Chittoor Cooperative Town Bank, Andhra Pradesh (1907), Rohika Union of Cooperative Credit Societies Ltd., Bihar (1909). Under this Act, several non credit initiatives also came up such as the Triplicane society in Madras which ran a consumer store, weaver credit cooperatives in Dharwar and Hubli, which gave credit in the form of yarn etc. However, these were registered as Urban Credit Societies.
The 1904 Act provided for constitution of societies, eligibility for membership, registration, liabilities on members, disposal of profits, shares and interests of members, privileges of societies, claims against members, audit, inspection and enquiry, dissolution, exemption from taxation and rule making power. All other operational and managerial issues were left to the local governments namely to formulate suitable rules and model bye-laws of the cooperative societies. The institution of the Registrar, visualized as a special official mechanism to be manned by officers with special training and appropriate attitudinal traits to prompt and catalyze cooperative development was the result of the Cooperative Societies Act of 1904.

4. Cooperative Societies Act, 1912

With the developments in terms of growth in the number of cooperatives, far exceeding anticipation, the Cooperative Societies Act of 1912 became a necessity and cooperatives could be organized under this Act for providing non-credit services to their members. The Act also provided for Federations of cooperatives.
With this enactment, in the credit sector, urban cooperative banks converted themselves into Central Cooperative Banks with primary cooperatives and individuals as their members. Similarly, non-credit activities were also cooperatively organized such as purchase and sales unions, mar­keting societies, and in the non agricultural sector, cooperatives of hand loom weavers and other artisans.
5. Maclagen Committee on Cooperation (1914)
The Banking Crisis and the First World War both affected the growth of cooperatives. Al­though member deposits in cooperatives increased sharply, the war affected the export and prices of cash crops adversely, resulting in increased over-dues of loans of primary agricultural societies. To take stock of the situation, in October, 1914 a Committee on Cooperation under Sir Edward Maclagen was appointed by the Government, in October 1914, to study the state of, and make recommendations for the future, of cooperatives. The Committee’s recommendations, which are detailed in Annexure-3, are basically related to credit cooperatives. It recommended building up a strong three-tier structure in every province with primaries at the base, the Central Cooperative Banks at the middle tier and the Provincial Cooperative Bank at the apex, basically to provide short-term and medium-term finance. Considerable emphasis was laid on ensuring the coopera­tive character of these institutions and training and member education, including training of the Registrar and his staff.

6. After the 1912 Act
The first Cooperative Housing Society, the Madras Cooperative Union in 1914, the Bombay Central Cooperative Institute in 1918 and similar institutions in Bengal, Bihar, Orissa, Punjab etc. came up. Other than consumer cooperatives and weavers cooperatives, other non-agricultural credit cooperatives generally performed well and grew in strength and operations during this period.

7. Government of India Act, 1919
In 1919, with the passing of the Reforms Act, Cooperation as a subject was transferred to the provinces. The Bombay Cooperative Societies Act of 1925, the first provincial Act to be passed, among others, introduced the principle of one-man one-vote.

8. The agricultural credit scenario
The agricultural credit scenario was a matter of concern and various committees looked into the problems of cooperative banks in various provinces. The Royal Commission on Agriculture in 1928 also reviewed the cooperative sector and among others recommended the setting up of land mortgage banks.

9. In both agricultural
In both agricultural and non agricultural non-credit sectors, societies were organized, but most faced difficulties in operation as a result of opposition by private marketing agencies and also the inexperience of their office bearers. This focused attention on strengthening of coopera­tive institutes and unions for education and training. A prominent development of this time was the setting up of the All India Association of Cooperative Institutes in 1929.

10. The setting up
The setting up of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) in 1934 was a major development in the thrust for agricultural credit. The Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 itself required the RBI to set up an Agricultural Credit Department. As cooperatives were to be channels for rural development, with the establishment of popularly elected governments in 1935, programmes were drawn up in which rural indebtedness received priority. The Mehta Committee appointed in 1937 specifically recommended reorganization of Cooperative Credit Societies as multi-purpose cooperatives.

11. The Second World War
The Second World War boosted the prices of agricultural commodities leading to increased returns to farmers and consequently reduction in over-dues to the cooperatives. To counter short­ages of essential commodities for domestic consumption as well as raw materials, the Government resorted to procurement of commodities from producers and rationing, for which it decided to utilize the cooperatives. This provided a momentum to the growth of multi-purpose cooperatives.

12. The period between
The period between 1939-1945 provided a further stimulus to the growth of the Urban Cooperative Credit structure. Many societies had started banking functions and had grown in size and operations over a period of time, with substantial diversification of activities.

13. Multi-Unit Cooperative Societies Act, 1942
With the emergence of cooperatives having a membership from more than one state such as the Central Government sponsored salary earners credit societies, a need was felt for an en­abling cooperative law for such multi-unit or multi-state cooperatives. Accordingly, the Multi-Unit Cooperative Societies Act was passed in 1942, which delegated the power of the Central Registrar of Cooperatives to the State Registrars for all practical purposes.

14. In 1944, the Gadgil Committee
In 1944, the Gadgil Committee recommended compulsory adjustment of debts and setting up of Agricultural Credit Corporations, wherever cooperative agencies were not strong enough.

15. Cooperative Planning Committee (1945)
The Cooperative Planning Committee under the chairmanship of Shri R.G. Saraiya was set up in 1945. The Committee found cooperative societies to be the most suitable medium for democratization of economic planning and examined each area of economic development.

16. Pre-Independence Development
In 1946, inspired by Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel and led by Shri Morarji Desai and Shri Trib­huvan Das Patel, the milk producers of Khera District of Gujarat went on a fifteen day strike. Their refusal to supply milk forced the Bombay Government to withdraw its order granting monopoly procurement rights to Polson, a private dairy. History was made when two Primary Village Milk Producer Societies were registered in October 1946. Soon after on 14th December 1946, the Khera District Cooperative Milk Producers Milk Union known as Amul was registered.
The Registrars’ Conference in 1947 recommended that the Provincial Cooperative Banks be re-organized to give greater assistance to primary societies through Central Banks. For the first time an effective linking of credit with marketing, and providing assistance by way of liberal loans and subsidies for establishment of a large number of godowns and processing plants was considered.
It would be appropriate to mention here some developments in Bombay vis-à-vis coop­eratives, which had an impact on the cooperative sector. Shri Vaikunth Bhai Mehta took over as Minister, In-charge of Cooperation in the Bombay Government after which the cooperative movement in the province received a boost. A Committee on Cooperative Education and Training under the chairmanship of Sir Janardan Madan, made recommendations for cooperative educa­tion programmes and the setting up of an Education Fund. The Agricultural Credit Organization Committee, with Sir Manilal Nanavati as Chairman recommended State assistance in agricultural finance and conversion of all credit cooperatives into multi-purpose cooperatives. It also recom­mended a three-tier cooperative credit banking system, and various subsidies etc.

17. Developments in the Post-Independence Era
After India attained Independence in 1947, cooperative development received a boost, with cooperatives being given a vital role in the various plans formulated by the Planning Com­mission.
The First Five Year Plan (1951-56), outlined in detail the vision of the cooperative movement in India and the rationale for emphasizing cooperatives and panchayats as preferred organizations for economic and political development. The Plan emphasized the adoption of the cooperative method of organization to cover all aspects of community development. It provided for setting up of urban cooperative banks, industrial cooperatives of workers, consumer cooperatives, housing cooperatives, diffusion of knowledge through cooperative training and education and recommended that every government department follow the policy of building up cooperatives.
All India Rural Credit Survey Committee (1951)
A major watershed initiative at this time was the appointment by Government of the Gorwala Committee, popularly known as the All India Rural Credit Survey Committee. The Committee was appointed in 1951 and submitted its report in 1954. It observed that large parts of the country were not covered by cooperatives and in such areas where it had been covered, a large segment of the agricultural population remained outside its membership. Even where membership did exist, the bulk of the credit requirement (75.2%) was met from other sources. The Com­mittee recommended introducing an integrated system of rural credit, partnership of the government in the share capital of the cooperatives and also appointment of government nominees on their boards, thus participating in their management. The Committee emphasized the importance of training. The creation of the State Bank of India was also a major recommendation. Detailed recommendations of the Committee have been presented in Annexure-3.
The Government and the elected representatives accepted the basic approach and the major recommendations of the Gorwala Committee. The Union Government acquired a major interest in the Imperial Bank which was converted into the State Bank of India. A National Cooperative Development and Warehousing Board was set up. The Reserve Bank of India Act was amended to enable it to play an active role in building up of cooperative credit institutions.
The All India Cooperative Congress, held at Patna in 1956, accepted the principle of state participation and government representation on the Board of Directors of cooperatives. It resolved that the number of such nominees should not exceed one-third of the total number of Directors or three, whichever is less and applicable even to cooperatives having government share capital in excess of 50% of total share capital. This recommendation was accepted by the Central Govern­ment.
In 1953, the Government of India and the Reserve Bank jointly constituted a Central Com­mittee for Cooperative Training to establish necessary training facilities for cooperative personnel. The All India Cooperative Union and the State Cooperative Unions were entrusted with training of members and office bearers of cooperative organizations.
The Second Five-Year Plan (1956-1961), emphasized “building up a cooperative sector as part of a scheme of planned development” as being one of the central aims of National Policy. It aimed at enabling cooperatives to increasingly become the principal basis for organization of economic activity. The Plan drew up programmes of cooperative development based on the recom­mendations of the All India Rural Credit Survey Committee (AIRCS). It was envisaged that every family in a village should be a member of at least one cooperative society. Linking of credit and non-credit societies to provide better services to the farmers was also targeted. State partnership with cooperative institutions at various levels, the essential basis of which was to be assistance and not interference or control, was recommended and for facilitating State partnership in cooperatives, the Plan also recommended the establishment of a National Agricultural Credit Long-term Opera­tions Fund. The National Cooperative Development Fund was also established by the Central Government, during this period, to enable states to borrow for the purpose of subscribing share capital of non credit cooperative institutions in the country.
The Industrial Policy Resolution of 1956 emphasized the need for State assistance to en­terprises, organized on a cooperative basis for industrial and agricultural purposes, and “to build up a large and growing cooperative sector”.
The Committee on Cooperative Law under the chairmanship of Shri S.T.Raja in 1956 recom­mended a Model Bill for consideration of State Governments. Another important development, at this time, which affected the cooperative sector, was the National Development Council Resolution (1958). The Resolution on Cooperative Policy stressed that cooperatives should be organized on the basis of the village community as the primary unit and that there should be close coordination between the village cooperative and the Panchayat. The Resolution also recommended that the restrictive features of existing cooperative legislation should be removed. Many State Governments amended their Acts, as a result of the recommendations of the Model Bill
Cooperative marketing and processing of agricultural produce formed an important part of the Integrated Scheme of Cooperative Development in the Second Plan. About 1900 primary marketing societies were set up and State Marketing Federations were established in all the States, as well as the National Cooperative Marketing Federation at the Centre. Marketing cooperatives along with the agricultural cooperatives played a major role in promoting the Green Revolution by providing credit and inputs to farmers as well as processing their increased outputs.
The Third Five Year Plan (1961-1969) stressed that “Cooperation should become, progres­sively, the principal basis of organization in branches of economic life, notably agriculture, minor irrigation, small industries and processing, marketing, distribution, rural electrification, housing and construction and provision of essential amenities for local communities. Even the medium and large industries and in transport an increasing range of activities can be undertaken on coopera­tive lines”.
From the mid-sixties onwards agro processing cooperatives, particularly in the sugar and spinning sector grew in number and contribution, driven primarily by the government’s policy of encouraging large scale industries in the cooperative sector and term loan assistance from financial institutions.
With the setting up of NDDB to replicate the Anand pattern of cooperatives in milk, the Indian dairy cooperative movement received a spurt. Later on NDDB also ventured into the field of edible oils
After the Indo-China war in 1962, both the Consumer Cooperative Structure and the Public Distribution System (PDS) was strengthened. The government as a matter of policy decided to give preference to consumer or other cooperatives in the allotment of fair price shops and certain States allotted new fair price shops only to cooperatives.
With the growth of public deposits in Urban Cooperative Credit Societies, it was felt nec­essary to insure these under the Deposit Insurance Scheme of Reserve Bank of India. Selective provisions of the RBI Act 1934 and later Banking Regulation Act 1949 were made applicable to Cooperative Banks w.e.f. March 1, 1966 to regulate their banking business and facilitate insurance coverage of deposits. Thus, they became an integral part of the banking system of the country.

18. Some National Institutions which came into existence in the 1960s
The Agricultural Refinance Corporation was set up in 1962 by the Government of India to provide long-term loans to cooperatives, through Central Land Mortgage Banks.
In 1963, the National Cooperative Development Corporation (NCDC) was established as a statutory corporation by an Act of Parliament. The establishment of the NCDC gave a great boost to the growth of cooperative marketing and processing societies.
While on a visit to Anand in October 1964, impressed by the socio-economic transformation brought about by milk cooperatives, Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri, the then Prime Minister of India, spoke of the desirability of setting up a national level organization, the National Dairy Development Board (NDDB), to replicate the Anand pattern of cooperatives in milk throughout the country.
Several other significant organizational developments also took place during this period such as the setting up of various National Cooperative Federations and re-organization of the National Cooperative Union of India (NCUI). In 1967, the Vaikunth Mehta National Institute of Cooperative Management was set up in Pune. Growth of consumer cooperatives was also an important devel­opment of this period. Simultaneously, the growth of Land Development Banks also accelerated and rural electric cooperatives and programmes for dairy, poultry, fishery and labour cooperatives were set up.

19. The Fourth Five Year Plan (1969-1974)
The Fourth Five Year Plan (1969-1974) gave high priority to the re-organization of coopera­tives to make cooperative short-term and medium-term structure viable. It also made necessary provisions to provide cooperatives with management subsidy and share capital contribution, as well as for the rehabilitation of Central Cooperative Banks. It also emphasized the need to orient policies in favour of small cultivators.

20. The Mirdha Committee
The Mirdha Committee in 1965 laid down standards to determine the genuineness of cooperative societies and suggest measures to weed out non genuine societies; to review the existing cooperative laws and practices to eliminate vested interest. The recommendations of the Committee resulted in amendments in the cooperative legislation in most states, which destroyed the autonomous and democratic character of cooperatives.

21. The Fifth Five Year Plan (1974-1979)
The Fifth Five Year Plan (1974-1979) took note of the high level of over-dues. In its recom­mended strategy for cooperative development, the correction of regional imbalances and reorient­ing the cooperatives towards the under-privileged was to receive special attention. Based on the recommendations of an Expert Group appointed by the Planning Commission in 1972, structural reform of the cooperative set-up was envisaged. The Plan recommended the formulation of Farmers’ Services Cooperative Societies as had been envisaged by the National Commission on Agriculture and stressed the need for professional management of cooperatives.

22. The Sixth Five Year Plan (1979-1985)
The Sixth Five Year Plan (1979-1985) also emphasized the importance of cooperative efforts being more systematically directed towards ameliorating the economic conditions of the rural poor. The Plan recommended steps for re-organizing Primary Agricultural Credit Societies into strong and viable multi-purpose units. It also suggested strengthening the linkages between consumer and marketing cooperatives. Consolidation of the role of Cooperative Federal Organi­zations, strengthening development of dairy, fishery and minor irrigation cooperatives, manpower development in small and medium cooperatives were some of the planned programmes.

23. NABARD Act, 1981
The National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) Act was passed in 1981 and NABARD was set up to provide re-finance support to Cooperative Banks and to supple­ment the resources of Commercial Banks and Regional Rural Banks to enhance credit flow to the agriculture and rural sector.

24. Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 1984
With the objective of introducing a comprehensive central legislation to facilitate the organi­zation and functioning of genuine multi-state societies and to bring uniformity in their administration and management, the MSCS Act of 1984 was enacted. The earlier Multi-Unit Cooperative Societies Act of 1942 was repealed.

25. The Seventh Five Year Plan (1985-1990)
The Seventh Five Year Plan (1985-1990) pointed out that while there had been all round progress in credit, poor recovery of loans and high level of overdues were matters of concern. The Plan recommended amongst others development of Primary Agricultural Credit Societies as multiple viable units; realignment of policies and procedures to expand flow of credit and ensure inputs and services particularly to weaker sections; special programmes for the North Eastern Region; strengthening of consumer cooperative movement in urban as well as rural areas and promoting professional management.

26. With increasing demand
With increasing demand from proponents of an autonomous cooperative movement and reforms in the Cooperative laws, the Government constituted a Committee on Cooperative Law for Democratization and Professionalization of Management in Cooperatives in 1985, headed by Shri K.N.Ardhanareeswaran. The Committee recommended the deletion of those legal provi­sions in State Cooperative Acts, which militate against the democratic character and autonomy of cooperatives, and also recommended incorporation of several provisions which could activize democratic processes for infusing professional management into cooperatives.

27. Similarly, in 1989
27. Similarly, in 1989 the Agricultural Credit Review Committee under the chairmanship of Prof. A.M. Khusro examined the problems of agricultural and rural credit and recommended a major systemic improvement. The Committee recommended that the Eighth Plan should become the plan for revival of weak agricultural credit societies.

28. Model Cooperatives Act, 1990
In 1990, an Expert Committee, under the chairmanship of Choudhary Brahm Perkash, was appointed by the Planning Commission to make a rapid review of the broad status of the cooperative movement, suggest future directions and finalize a Model Cooperatives Act. The Committee submitted its report in 1991. Since cooperation is a State subject and each State has its own cooperative legislation covering cooperatives whose membership is confined to the State, the report of the Committee, along with a draft Model Cooperative Law, was circulated to all State Governments for their consideration and adoption at State level.

29. The opening up of the economy in 1990
The opening up of the economy in 1990, and the liberalized economic policies followed by the government since then, led to increasing pressures for various governments, state and central, to bring about changes that would provide cooperatives a level playing field to compete with the private sector. The Eighth Five Year Plan (1992-1997) laid emphasis on building up the cooperative movement as a self-managed, self-regulated and self-reliant institutional set-up, by giving it more autonomy and democratizing the movement. It also spoke of enhancing the capability of cooperatives for improving economic activity and creating employment opportunities for small farmers, labourers, artisans, scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and women and emphasized development and training of cooperative functionaries in professional management.

30. Parallel Cooperative Legislation
From the Ninth Plan (1997-2002) onwards, there has been no specific mention about coop­eratives as a part of the Plan. Since Cooperation is a State subject and recognizing the difficulties in having the existing State Cooperative Acts amended on the lines of the Model Cooperatives Act, a section of cooperators and civil society initiated action to put in place Parallel Cooperative Legislation for self-reliant cooperatives. Self- reliant cooperatives are generally defined as those which have not received any assistance from the Government in the form of equity contribution, loans and guarantees. These Acts are largely based on the recommendations of the Choudhary Brahm Perkash Committee. Nine States namely AP (1995), MP (1999), Bihar (1996), J&K (1999), Orissa (2001), Karnataka (1997), Jharkhand (1996)), Chhattisgarh (1999) and Uttaranchal (2003), have so far enacted Parallel Cooperative Acts which are enabling and ensure autonomous and democratic functioning of cooperatives.

31. Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002
The Multi-State Cooperative Societies (MSCS) Act, enacted in 1984, was modified in 2002, in keeping with the spirit of the Model Cooperatives Act. Unlike the State Laws, which remained as a parallel legislation to co-exist with the earlier laws, the MSCS Act, 2002 replaced the earlier Act of 1984.

32. National Cooperative Policy (2002)
In 2002, the Government of India enunciated a National Cooperative Policy. The objective of the Policy is to facilitate an all round development of cooperatives in the country. The policy promises to provide cooperatives with the necessary support, encouragement and assistance, to ensure their functioning as autonomous, self-reliant and democratically managed institutions, accountable to their members, and making a significant contribution to the national economy.
Based on the recommendations made at a Conference of State Ministers for Cooperation, the Government of India in 2002 constituted a Ministerial Task Force to formulate a plan of action for implementation of National Cooperative Policy. The Task Force suggested that a single law instead of parallel laws should be introduced in the States. It also recommended, among others, that in order to depoliticize cooperatives, Members of Parliament or Members of Legislative As­semblies should not be allowed to hold office of any cooperative society.

33. The Companies Amendment Act, 2002
A Committee under the chairmanship of Dr.Y.K.Alagh recommended the amendment of the Companies Act, 1956. On the basis of the recommendations of the Committee, the Producer Companies Bill was introduced in the Parliament and became law on 6th February, 2003 as Part IXA - Producer Companies in the Companies Act, 1956. Based on the cooperative principles of mutual assistance, it provides an alternative to the institutional form that is presently available to cooperative enterprises.

34. NCDC Amendment Act, 2002
Recognizing the need to improve its scope of lending and to bring about changes in its funding, the NCDC Act was amended in 2002, which has enabled it to cover notified services, livestock and industrial activities and more importantly to directly fund cooperatives against suit­able security.

35. Task Force on Revival of Cooperative Credit Institutions
To nurse the rural cooperative credit system back to health, to ensure that the rural credit doubled over three years and that the coverage of small and marginal farmers by institutional lending was expanded substantially, the Government of India in August 2004 set up a Task Force to sug­gest an action plan for reviving rural cooperative credit institutions and legal measures necessary for facilitating this process. The Task Force, chaired by Prof. A. Vaidyanathan, recommended that any financial restructuring which did not address the root causes of the weaknesses of the system would not result in its sustained revival and would require legal measures. The recommendations of the Task Force in accordance with its Terms of Reference are basically confined to revival of credit cooperatives for which it suggests a financial package. The Vaidyanathan Committee has also suggested a model cooperative law that can be enacted by the State Governments. Recom­mendations of the Task Force are being currently implemented. The Vaidyanathan Committee has also given its report on the long-term cooperative credit structure.

36. Cooperative Movement at a Glance
Cooperatives, in all spheres, today cover approximately 99% of Indian villages and 71% of total rural households in the country. Their contribution to the national economy may be seen from the following table:
Cooperative share in the economy - Percentage
Agricultural Credit Disbursed - 18*
Fertilizer Distributed         - 36*
Production of Fertilizer   - 25*
Sugar Produced      - 50**
Spindleage - 10#
Milk Procurement to Production  - 8$
Yarn Production - 22#
Handlooms - 54#
Wheat Procurement   - 33#
Fishermen Cooperatives - 21#
Storage Facilities (Village)   - 64# 


History of Avadian


History of Avadian

Avadian is a brand-new credit union 80 years in the making. Formerly Alabama Telco, we began operations in December of 1934 with seven charter members and a capital base of $70. We originally formed to serve telephone company employees and their families. Our name has since changed and our membership has far grown outside the telephone company, BUT our founding principles are still the same.
We continue to be member-owned and member-focused. We are the only financial service provider that will go out of its way every day to value you as a person, to make you feel delight and to improve your life.
Today, we serve over 65,000 members through ever-increasing delivery points: Avadian branches throughout Alabama; a shared network of CO-OP branches and ATMs across the United States; online, mobile and telephone banking; and social media outlets. We pride ourselves on continually receiving a "5-STAR Superior Rating" from BauerFinancial for safety and soundness. With approximately $600 million in assets, Avadian Credit Union is one of the largest credit unions in Alabama.
Avadian Credit Union isn't just another financial institution. We are someone you can trust with your money, because we aren't just about rates, returns, features and fees. We're working to be so much more. We're working to improve your financial life.


Why Choose Avadian Credit Union?

Picking the right financial institution is important to your financial success. At Avadian Credit Union, we don’t want to brag but we have found that:
  • Some love our low loan rates.
  • Others love our great rates on our savings accounts and deposits.
  • Some members are not rate sensitive but are just thrilled they CAN get a loan.
  • Others love our personal service.
  • Some don’t care about personal service, but love the convenience.
  • Some love our electronic services.
  • Others love coming into a branch and seeing the same friendly face.
  • Believe it or not, some just love us because we’re a cooperative – meaning we are run by our members and for our members.
  • Others love us because the money stays local and benefits the community.
  • Some love the lower fees.
  • But most of all, we found our members love us because we do what’s in THEIR financial best interest, even when it’s not in the Credit Union’s
    best interest.

Things you should consider when choosing the right financial institution:
  1. 1. Convenience
  • How easily accessible are they to your home or office? We have branches all over the state and are part of the CO-OP Shared Branch and ATM networks, providing you with nearly 5,000 credit union branches and 30,000 ATM locations nationwide. for a list of our branch locations.
  • Do they offer telephone banking or internet banking? Yes, we do, plus we offer mobile banking!  to learn more about our electronic services.
  • What are their hours of operation? We are opened Monday through Friday from 8:45 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Several of our branches and most of our CO-OP shared branches are even open on Saturdays.  to learn more.
  • Do they have various ATM locations? We have them across the state and will even waive your ATM fee if you sign up for our Choice Checking account and choose “nationwide ATM refunds” as a feature.  for a list of our ATM locations. to learn more about our Choice Checking.
  1. 2. Products
  • Are they a full-service institution? We offer so many quality products and services; we’re running out of room on our website for all of them!  to view our complete lineup. 
  • Does their product lineup match your financial needs now and also in the future? Our products are extensive and are designed to accommodate every life stage.
  • Do they offer special products and programs that other financial institutions maybe don’t have? We’ve done our research. We know what our members want and what’s out there that we think they will want, need or love. We try to give it all to them.
  1. 3. Service
  • Do they have a friendly and knowledgeable staff ready to assist you and your needs at all times? Our staff completes extensive training and is always willing to help. In fact, we are even on a first-name basis with most of our members. to meet our Branch Managers. 
  1. 4. Fees
  • Do they have a lot of unnecessary fees? Are their fees higher or lower than most? Because we’re a credit union, we typically have fewer and lower fees than most banks.  t
  1. 5. Stability
  • What is their history? How long have they been in business? We’ve been in business since 1934 and continue to grow strong.  
  • Do they have a high rating for safety and soundness? We have a “5 Star” Superior Rating by Bauer Financial for Safety and Soundness. This is the highest rating a financial institution can receive.
  • How much do they have in assets and is their loan portfolio strong? We have over 600 million in assets and that number continues to grow. We are very proud of our loan portfolio. Despite other institutions, we have managed to steer clear of recent economic struggles by not entering into risky loans.  to view our most recent annual report. 
  1. 6. Interest Rates
  • Are their rates competitive? Are they better than the rest? Since we’re a credit union, our rates are usually better than most financial institutions.  
  • Do they offer discounts on loans or bonuses on CDs? We always think there is room for improvement even with our great rates, so we like to offer discounts, bonuses and specials throughout the year.

How To Join

Joining Avadian is easier than you think! If you meet any of the following requirements, visit your local Avadian branch or call us at 1.888.AVADIAN to sign up today.
County Eligibility
Individuals who live, work, worship or attend school in the following counties are eligible for membership:
  • Autauga
  • Baldwin
  • Blount
  • Calhoun
  • Cherokee
  • Coffee
  • Colbert
  • Cullman
  • Dallas
  • DeKalb
  • Elmore
  • Etowah
  • Geneva
  • Houston
  • Jackson
  • Jefferson
  • Lauderdale
  • Lawrence
  • Lee
  • Limestone
  • Madison
  • Marion
  • Marshall
  • Mobile
  • Montgomery
  • Morgan
  • Pike
  • Randolph
  • Shelby
  • St. Clair
  • Talladega
  • Tuscaloosa
  • Walker
  • Winston
For a complete list of branches in and around these counties, click here.
For a map of the counties we serve, click here.
Employment Eligibility
If you are an employee of an Avadian select employee group (SEG), you are eligible for membership. Click here to see if your company is a SEG of Avadian. For information on how your company or association can offer Avadian service, please call 1.888.AVADIAN (1.888.282.3426).
If offered by your employer, you may use payroll deduction and/or direct deposit by also completing a Payroll Allotment Authorization Form. Please contact any of our branch locations for further information about payroll deduction/direct deposit.
Family Eligibility
If you are related by blood or marriage to members of Avadian Credit Union, you are eligible for membership.
If you meet any of the above eligibility requirements, join Avadian today!
All you need to do is complete a membership request formshow two forms of proper identification and make a minimum $5 deposit in an Avadian savings (share) account. Once you’re a member, you can start enjoying all of our great products, services and rates.

Branch Locations

Now serving members at over 5,000 branch locations and nearly 30,000 ATM locations nationwide!
Below is a list of branch locations, business hours and phone numbers. While we offer branch locations and ATMs throughout the state of Alabama, we are also partners with the CO-OP Shared Branching and ATM networks, which currently have over 5,000 branch locations nationwide and nearly 30,000 ATM locations nationwide, giving you more options in conducting select Avadian transactions. To learn more about the CO-OP Shared Branching and ATM networks, click here.
Avadian Tidbit: If you are an iPhone® or Android user, be sure to visit your appropriate app store to download the Avadian app and to search "Credit Union Shared Branching" for the CO-OP app. Now you can find the nearest Branch, ATM or shared branch location wherever you are at any time!
iPhone® is a trademark of Apple, Inc. Avadian Credit Union is not affiliated with, sponsored by, or endorsed by Apple Inc.

Birmingham

Corporate Headquarters
Mailing: P.O. Box 360287
Birmingham, AL 35236-0287

Street: 1 Riverchase Parkway South
Hoover, AL 35244
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 985-2828 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 985-2826
No Branch Access.
See Hoover listing for branch information.
Chelsea
15660 Highway 280
Chelsea, AL 35043
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 678-7797 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 678-7718
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Colonnade
3439 Colonnade Pkwy, Suite 100
Birmingham, AL 35243
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 967-2993 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 967-6069
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Downtown
613 19th Street North
Birmingham, AL 35203
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 252-8024 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 252-4109
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Gardendale
405 Fieldstown Road
Gardendale, Al 35071
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 631-2455 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 631-6460
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Greystone
420 Old Highway 280
Birmingham, Al 35242
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 437-3696 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 437-3698
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Saturday: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. CST
Helena
4849 County Highway 52 West
Helena, AL 35080
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 621-4262 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 621-4263
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Homewood (This branch is moving!)
103 Oxmoor Road
Birmingham, AL 35209
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 942-9977 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 942-4989
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Homewood (New location coming December 19, 2016!)
475 Green Springs Highway
Birmingham, AL 35209
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 942-9977 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 942-4989
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Hoover
4720 Chace Circle
Hoover, AL 35244
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 989-5220 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 988-3891
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Saturday: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. CST
Hueytown
148 River Square Plaza
Hueytown, AL 35023
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 491-6217 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 491-9541
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Pelham
3016 Pelham Parkway
Pelham, AL 35124
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 620-2332 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 620-2342
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Trussville
Mailing: P.O. Box 1308
Trussville, AL 35173

Street: 2150 Gadsden Highway
Birmingham, AL 35235
Google Maps
Phone: (205) 661-9712 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (205) 661-9714
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Saturday: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. CST

Other Locations

Dothan
2378 West Main Street
Dothan, AL 36301
Google Maps
Phone: (334) 702-8759 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (334) 702-1807
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Saturday: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. CST
Dothan (S.E. AL Medical Center) Branch
1091 Ross Clark Circle
Dothan, AL 36303
Google Maps
Phone: (334) 702-8741 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (334) 702-1907
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Geneva
309 West Maple Ave.
Geneva, AL 36340
Google Maps
Phone: (334) 684-2241 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (334) 684-2699
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Madison
8566 Madison Boulevard
Madison, AL 35758
Google Maps
Phone: (256) 774-3988 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (256) 774-3989
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Mobile
809 Downtowner Blvd
Mobile, AL 36609
Google Maps
Phone: (251) 343-2027 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (251) 343-7703
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Montgomery
2906 Atlanta Highway
Montgomery, AL 36109
Google Maps
Phone: (334) 271-4526 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (334) 277-0411
Mon - Thurs: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST
Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. CST
South Parkway
3301 Memorial Parkway SW
Huntsville, AL 35801
Google Maps
Phone: (256) 536-5626 or (888) 282-3426
Fax: (256) 428-1177
Monday - Friday: 8:45 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. CST