The President? No thank you

pressreleasepoint.com

A new survey by Korn Ferry, the preeminent global people and organizational advisory firm, finds that the vast majority of corporate professionals would much rather take the helm of their own organization than become President of the United States.

In the November 2016 survey of nearly 1,500 respondents, only 15 percent said they would choose being President of the United States over being the CEO of their own company.

“In a way, you could consider the incoming U.S. President as the Next National CEO,” said Rick Lash, Korn Ferry Hay Group senior partner. “While serving as a corporate CEO is generally considered a very challenging role, executives acknowledge the U.S. President faces hurdles that are much higher than those faced by a leader in corporate America.”

Eighty-one percent of respondents say that the role of U.S. President is more complex than the role of CEO at a Standard & Poors 500 (S&P 500) company.

Despite that complexity, participants acknowledge the positive reasons one would pursue the presidency. Nearly three-quarters (72 percent) said the No. 1 reason someone would want to be president is to “make a difference.” None of the respondents cited salary/compensation as the top reason someone would want the role.

Even though the incoming president is taking only $1 to assume his role, the president’s compensation as set by Congress is $400,000 annually, plus $150,000 for expenses and travel. According to 71 percent of respondents, the president would be undercompensated at the standard offered salary.

Nearly 50 percent of respondents (46 percent) believe the president should receive at least a $10.4 million compensation package annually, which is the average compensation for a CEO at an S&P 500 company.

About the Survey – The Korn Ferry survey was conducted in November 2016 and garnered 1,432 responses.

Survey Responses:

Would you rather be CEO of your company or President of the United States?

CEO of my company:  85 percent
President of the United States:  15 percent

Who do you think has a more complex job?

CEO of a Standard & Poor's 500 company:  19 percent
President of the United States:  81 percent

What is the top reason someone would want to be U.S. President?

Salary/Compensation:  0 percent
Challenge:  7 percent
To be in power:   22 percent
To make a difference:  72 percent

What attribute is the most important for a U.S. President?

Driving growth:   32 percent
Managing crisis:   19 percent
Developing strategies:   42 percent
Financial management:   7 percent

At $400,000 annually (plus $150,000 for expenses and travel), is the President of the United States be fairly compensated?

Overcompensated:   5 percent
Correctly Compensated:   24 percent
Undercompensated:   71 percent

What do you feel is the most appropriate compensation for the President of the United States?

More than $10.4 million (median total compensation for Standard and Poors 500 CEO):   22 percent
$10.4 million (median compensation for Standard and Poor’s 500 CEO):   24 percent
$400,000, plus $150,000 for expenses and travel (compensation for president of the United States):   41 percent
Less than $400,000, plus $150,000 for expenses and travel:   11 percent

House GOP could consider leader term limits

From ILLINOIS NEWS NETWORK

The state’s longest-serving House speaker could find himself the only holdout on implementing term limits for legislative leaders.

There are a couple of ways to bring about term limits for legislative leaders. The Illinois Senate adopted a resolution for leader term limits for their chamber. The House could do the same.

Republican state Rep. Tim Butler, R-Springfield, said he’s urging House minority Leader Jim Durkin, R-Western Springs, to implement leader term limits within the House Republican caucus.

“We can do it on ourselves,” he said. “We don’t need legislation to make this happen. We can do it within our own rules of our caucus, and that’s something I think we should do.”

Durkin’s office said that he will take the issue up with caucus members.

Another way to have legislative term limits placed on both chambers is through a constitutional amendment, something Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno, R-Lemont, recently filed.

National Conference of State Legislatures Program Director Wendy Underhill said without term limits on legislative leaders, it’s possible that a person elected from one district could amass more power than someone elected by an entire state.

“It seems as though that makes the speaker a very powerful person, probably able to be as powerful as the governor,” Underhill said.

Butler said it makes sense to enforce term limits on leaders.

“I’m one person who believes that turnover after a bit of time is be good, and it certainly would not get us into the position we are today with Speaker (Mike) Madigan,” he said.

A spokesman for Madigan — who’s been speaker for over 30 years — said term limits are applied by voters every two years; however, he didn’t directly address leaders, who are selected by senators and representatives.

Rauner warns striking AFSCME workers would be fired

By ILLINOIS NEWS NETWORK

State officials are warning members of the state’s largest public employee union that their job, pay and benefits are at stake if they go forward with a proposed strike.

The union, AFSCME, told its members Friday they’ve scheduled a strike authorization vote sometime between Jan. 30 and mid-February. AFSCME leadership said the governor is waging a war on workers. Gov. Bruce Rauner said the state’s largest union should look around.

“What I hope we can do is work together to implement our contract. That’s where we’re at,” Rauner said. “It should be done. We’re at a place where we’ve done 19 other contracts with unions and the government. They’re good, fair contracts for employees and taxpayers.”

The union filed an appeal of the state labor board’s impasse declaration last month. The case may have to be decided by the state supreme court.

A memo from the governor’s office of labor relations to state employees said consequences of a strike include no pay, strikers would pay full cost of health insurance, and if the strike were deemed illegal, the striker would be fired.

The memo obtained by the Illinois News Network said the bridge agreement to the next contract had a “no strike, no lockout” clause, which could mean a strike would be illegal. Deputy Director of Labor Relations John Terranova said the state “will vigorously pursue all lawful means at its disposal for challenging an unlawful strike.”

Rauner said a strike wouldn’t be good for anyone.

“If it were to happen, we would be ready,” Rauner said Tuesday at an event in Rochester.

The memo said if there is a strike the state will tap whatever resources it needs, from private vendors, other states and local governments, to maintain services.

“But we are hoping and encouraging them, let’s just implement the contract, and stay at work and do productive things for the people of Illinois,” Rauner said.

Even if a strike were authorized, AFSCME’s message to its members said, “That does not necessarily mean there will be a strike—as the committee will continue to do everything possible to reach a fair settlement. But it does mean that if all such efforts fail, you will be prepared to go out on strike when the committee issues the call.”

AFSCME’s last contract expired summer of 2015.

Rural Americans at more peril than urban residents

A new CDC study demonstrates that Americans living in rural areas are more likely to die from five leading causes than their urban counterparts.

In 2014, many deaths among rural Americans were potentially preventable, including 25,000 from heart disease, 19,000 from cancer, 12,000 from unintentional injuries, 11,000 from chronic lower respiratory disease, and 4,000 from stroke.

The percentages of deaths that were potentially preventable were higher in rural areas than in urban areas. The report and a companion commentary are part of a new rural health series in CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

"This new study shows there is a striking gap in health between rural and urban Americans," said CDC Director Tom Frieden, M.D., M.P.H. "To close this gap, we are working to better understand and address the health threats that put rural Americans at increased risk of early death."

About 46 million Americans — 15 percent of the U.S. population — currently live in rural areas. Several demographic, environmental, economic, and social factors might put rural residents at higher risk of death from these public health conditions.

Residents of rural areas in the United States tend to be older and sicker than their urban counterparts. They have higher rates of cigarette smoking, high blood pressure, and obesity. Rural residents report less leisure-time physical activity and lower seatbelt use than their urban counterparts. They also have higher rates of poverty, less access to healthcare, and are less likely to have health insurance.

The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), which houses the Federal Office of Rural Health Policy, will collaborate with CDC on the series and will help to promote the findings and recommendations to rural communities. 

"We have seen increasing rural-urban disparities in life expectancy and mortality emerge in the past few years. CDC's focus on these critical rural health issues comes at an important time," said Jim Macrae, Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) acting administrator. 

In the study, mortality data for U.S. residents was analyzed from the National Vital Statistics System.

Counties were placed in two categories—urban or rural—based on the NCHS urban-rural classification scheme for counties. The current study found that unintentional injury deaths were approximately 50 percent higher in rural areas than in urban areas, partly due to greater risk of death from motor vehicle crashes and opioid overdoses. Also, because of the distance between healthcare facilities and trauma centers, rapid access to specialized care can be more challenging for people injured in rural areas.

The gaps in health can be addressed. For example, healthcare providers in rural areas can:

• Screen patients for high blood pressure and make control a quality improvement goal. High blood pressure is a leading risk factor for heart disease and stroke.
• Increase cancer prevention and early detection. Rural healthcare providers should participate in the state-level comprehensive control coalitions. Comprehensive cancer control programs focus on cancer prevention, education, screening, access to care, support for cancer survivors, and overall good health.
• Encourage physical activity and healthy eating to reduce obesity. Obesity has been linked to a variety of serious chronic illnesses, including diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and arthritis.
• Promote smoking cessation. Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the United States and is the most significant risk factor for chronic lower respiratory disease.
• Promote motor vehicle safety. Rural healthcare providers should encourage patients to always wear a seat belt and counsel parents and child care providers to use age- and size-appropriate car seats, booster seats, and seat belts on every trip.
• Engage in safer prescribing of opioids for pain. Healthcare providers should follow the CDC guideline when prescribing opioids for chronic pain and educate patients on the risks and benefits of opioids and using nonpharmacologic therapies to provide greater benefit.

Not all deaths can be prevented. Some rural areas might have characteristics that put residents at higher risk of death, such as long travel distances to specialty and emergency care or exposures to specific environmental hazards. It's also possible that excessively high death rates could signal a need for improved public health programs that support healthier behaviors and neighborhoods or better access to health care services.

To read the entire report and companion commentary: www.cdc.gov/mmwr. 

For more information on rural health: www.hrsa.gov/ruralhealth.