Features of the labor market in the USSR essays and term papers. Effective employment policy in the USSR. labor market in post-revolutionary Russia. labor market under NEP Peculiarities of labor of women and persons with family responsibilities

Bibliography:

Anikst A. Organization of labor distribution. M., 1920.
Anikst A. M. Memories of Vladimir Ilyich. M., 1933.
Anikst A. M. Organization of labor in 1920. M., 1920.
Arnoldov A. Colonization of Murman. Achievements and prospects. L., 1924.
Barchuk V. Collective farms must provide labor to industry // Collectivist. 1931. No. 3.
Bakhutov A. Unemployment and ways to overcome it. M. - L., 1930.
Bogdanovsky A. Prospects for industrial colonization of the Northwestern region // Problems of industrial and industrial colonization: proceedings of the State Research Institute of Land Management and Resettlement. M., 1930. T. XI.
Gindin Ya. Combating unemployment and hiring labor. M., 1927.
State Colonization Research Institute. Its tasks, organization and activities // Proceedings of the State Research Institute. M., 1924. T. 1.
Gurov P. Ya. How to employ extra workers in the village. M. - L., 1927.
Evdokimov A. About otkhodnichestvo from collective farms. M. – L., 1931.
Isaev A. Unemployment in the USSR and the fight against it (for the period 1917-1924). M., 1924.
Isaev A. Unemployment and the fight against it in 1922 // Bulletin of Labor. 1923. No. 3.
History of the Moscow Tool Plant / ed. B. Ratner. M., 1934.
Kalinin A. Not gravity, but organized recruitment // Collectivist. 1931. No. 15-16.
Karelo-Murmansk region. 1932. No. 1-2.
Klivansky S. Otkhodnichestvo in the USSR in 1928-1931. // Bulletin of Labor. 1932. No. 10.
Kogan L. M. Old and new cadres of the proletariat. M., 1934.
Kolokoltsev S. Changes in the workers’ army of Petrograd // Labor Statistics. 1919. No. 1-4.
Collective farms of the USSR in 1930. Results of reports of collective farms to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (b). M. – L., 1931.
Kolyshkin N. First all-Russian meeting on resettlement // Karelo-Murmansk region. 1927. No. 4.
Krasilnikov M.P. Five-Year Plan and Workers // Soviet Asia. 1931. No. 1-2.
Kupletsky B. Expeditionary work on the Kola Peninsula in 1927 // Karelo-Murmansk region. 1928. No. 1.
Larin Yu. Agricultural proletariat of the USSR. M., 1927.
Lebedev P. Working life in the mines of Kuzbass // Life of Siberia. 1924. No. 3-4.
Lenin collection XX. M., 1932.
Lubny-Gertsyk L.I. The land question in connection with the problem of population. M., 1917.
Lubny-Gertsyk L.I. Materials on the issue of excess labor in agriculture of the USSR // Proceedings of the State Research Institute. M., 1926. T. III.
Lubny-Gertsyk L.I. On the work of the State Committee for Research Institute’s Commission to study the issue of excess labor in the USSR // Proceedings of the State Committee for Research Institute. M., 1926. T. II.
Markus B.I. Labor in Soviet society. M., 1939.
Martens L.K. Immigration of Russian workers from foreign countries and our industry // Economic life. 1921 July 20.
Materials on the issue of excess labor in agriculture of the USSR // Proceedings of the State Research Institute. M., 1926. T. III.
Mints L. E. Use of labor // Bulletin of Labor. M., 1921. Sat. 1.
Mints L.E. Departure of the peasant population for work in the USSR. M., 1924.
On resettlement: Resolution of the Central Executive Committee and Council of People's Commissars of the USSR of July 2, 1930 // Socialist agriculture. 1930. No. 5.
Essay on the work of the Murmansk railway in 1923-24. / ed. A. A. Arnoldova. L., 1925.
Pass S. On labor recruitment in the village. M. - L., 1933.
Regulations on the colonization of the Karelo-Murmansk region: Decree of the STO of May 25, 1923 // Resettlement Affairs: collection. decrees and orders for resettlement / ed. M. A. Bolshakova. M., 1927.
Problems of industrial and fishing colonization // Proceedings of the State Research Institute of Land Management and Resettlement. M., 1930. T. XI.
Samoilova K. Modern unemployment and the fight against it. Pg., 1918.
Samuel I. I. "Intergelpo" is a Czechoslovak fishing cooperative in Kyrgyzstan. M. – L., 1935.
Sakharov A. M. Perspective five-year plan for resettlement on land funds of all-Union significance // Bulletin of land management and resettlement. M., 1928. Book. 5.
Seleznev S. A. Results and prospects for district development Far North// Economy of the North. 1924. No. 8.
Simkhovich M. AMO in 1921-1924. (IV part of the history of the Stalin Automobile Plant). M., 1933.
Collection of laws. 1922. No. 79. Art. 997.
Sovinsky M. Mountain riches of Karelia // Karelo-Murmansk region. 1927. No. 3.
Sonin M. Ya. Issues of resettlement in the third five-year plan // Problems of economics. 1940. No. 3.
Stepanov D. Does rationalization increase unemployment? M. - L., 1929.
Stoklitsky A. How industrial immigration works // Economic life. 1921. October 20.
Strumilin S.G. Two years of the dictatorship of the proletariat in 1917-1919: collection. M., 1919.
Third session of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR of the 5th convocation: verbatim report. M., 1931. Bulletin No. 20. P. 28-29.
Fedyaev P. On the organized recruitment of labor // Soviet construction. 1935. No. 9.
Freidman S. Organization of otkhodnichestvo on collective farms // Collectivist. 1930. No. 22.
Khodorovsky I. Revolution and the labor market in Russia. M., 1920.
Khodorovsky I. The labor market in Russia in 1918. M., 1919.
Tsikhon A. M. Organize labor in a new way // Bulletin of Labor. 1931. No. 8-9.
Chirkin G.F. Colonization tasks in the Russian North // Questions of colonization: periodical collection. 1917. No. 20.
Chirkin G.F. The Khibiny problem and the Murmansk railway // Karelo-Murmansk region. 1930. No. 2.
Shakhmatov A. Unemployment and the fight against it. M., 1928.
Shvartsman D. How the Soviet government and trade unions fight unemployment. M. - L., 1927.
Shelepugin F. What should not be forgotten during the colonization of the Karelo-Murmansk region // Karelo-Murmansk region. 1930. No. 9-10.
Shmidt V.V. Regulation of the labor market for seasonal workers in the USSR. M., 1927.
Eingorn I. Control figures for the Murmansk district for 1931 // Karelo-Murmansk region. 1931. No. 1-2.
Eichfeld I. Mineralogical expedition // Karelo-Murmansk region. 1929. No. 2.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 3
CHAPTER 1. PROBLEMS OF THE FORMATION AND FORMATION OF THE LABOR MARKET IN THE USSR 5
1.1. History of the labor market in Soviet Russia and the USSR 5
1.2. Features of the “labor market” in the USSR 10
CHAPTER 2. LABOR STRATEGIES OF SOVIET SOCIETY AND THE FORMATION OF THE LABOR MARKET IN RUSSIA 12
CHAPTER 3. LABOR MARKET IN RUSSIA: MODERN TRENDS 19
3.1. The formation of the labor market in the new Russia 19
3.2. Features of the labor market in the new Russia 24
CONCLUSION 32
LIST OF SOURCES USED 33

INTRODUCTION
In system economic relations The labor market plays an important role. In this market, the interests of able-bodied people and employers who represent state, municipal, public and private organizations collide. The relations that develop in the labor market have a pronounced socio-economic character. They address the urgent needs of the majority of the country's population. Through the mechanism of the labor market, employment levels and wages are established. A significant consequence of ongoing processes in the labor market is unemployment, an almost inevitable phenomenon of social life.
The relevance of the chosen topic lies in the fact that the labor market is one of the indicators, the state of which makes it possible to judge national well-being, stability, and the effectiveness of socio-economic transformations. The diverse economy of any state places high demands on the quality of the workforce, its professional and qualification composition and level of training; further development only intensifies competition between workers. Thus, the tasks of clarifying the influence of factors that shape processes in the labor market, assessing patterns, trends and prospects for its development are updated.
At the present stage of development of the labor market, non-standard forms of employment are of particular importance. “Non-standard” employment is a form of employment with non-standard working conditions, part-time work on the basis of a fixed-term employment contract at an enterprise or organization. In non-standard employment, the following subtypes of employment are distinguished: part-time employment, temporary employment, non-permanent employment, underemployment, underemployment, overemployment, secondary employment, self-employment, employment in the informal sector, agency labor (outsourcing, outstaffing, personnel leasing), remote or remote employment.
The purpose of the course work is to identify problems in the formation and formation of the labor market in the USSR and Russia.
Based on the goal, this work sets the following tasks:
- Determine the features of the labor market;
- Study the mechanism of functioning of the labor market;
- Research current state labor market in the USSR and Russia and determine the problems of its formation and formation;
- Identify ways to improve the mechanism of functioning of the labor market in the USSR and Russia.
The object is the labor market in the USSR and Russia. The subject of the study is the functioning mechanism and features of the formation of the labor market.
The theoretical and methodological basis for writing the work were the works of leading Russian economists, such as Rudenko G.G., Murtozaev B.Ch., Agapova T.A., Zaslavsky I.K., Kyazimov K.G., Odegov Yu.G. etc. When writing the work we used legislative acts Russian Federation in the field of labor legislation, statistical data on the issues under study in the Russian Federation.
When writing the course work, the following methods were used - study and analysis of scientific literature and statistical methods of data processing.
The course work consists of an introduction, three main parts, a conclusion, a list of sources used, and applications.

CHAPTER 1. PROBLEMS OF THE FORMATION AND FORMATION OF THE LABOR MARKET IN THE USSR
1.1. History of the labor market in Soviet Russia and the USSR

The labor market institution represents one of the most important economic foundations that are important for the socio-economic life of society. Therefore, the study of its characteristics at various stages of historical development allows us to most fully imagine what happened in the economic system in different time periods.
In 1915-16 for the first time in Russian Empire An attempt was made to organize the distribution of labor in the country: the All-Russian Labor Bureau was organized, as well as local labor bureaus, which primarily served the needs of refugees. Then the work of organizing the labor market began only in August 1917, i.e. six months after the February Revolution of 1917: the law on labor exchanges appeared. While Russia was at war, there was no noticeable unemployment. However, the opposite phenomenon was observed: the defense industry and agriculture experienced a shortage of workers, and the economic policy of “mobilizing industrial labor” was pursued. There were no free workers on the labor market, so the labor of prisoners of war, soldiers and immigrants (“foreigners”) was intensively used. The use of prisoner-of-war labor occurred throughout Russia during the period from 1915 (140 thousand) to 1918 inclusive (95 thousand). The maximum number of prisoners of war in Russia was in 1917 and exceeded 1.5 million people. This free labor was used in various state-owned enterprises: mining factories, ports, timber and peat harvesting, as well as in front-line work...

CONCLUSION
Based on the results of the work done, we can conclude that:
The labor market is a market for labor resources as a commodity, the equilibrium price and quantity of which are determined by the interaction of supply and demand. The labor market is an integral integral part market system. It has developed as a system of social relations, reflecting the level of development and the balance of interests achieved at a given period between entrepreneurs, workers and the state.
The labor market is the most complex element market economy. Here the interests of the employee and the employer intertwine when determining the price of labor and the conditions for its functioning, but also reflect almost all socio-economic changes in society.
The Russian labor market is not balanced: on the one hand, it is excessive in volume, and on the other hand, it is labor-deficient in its structure, that is, there is an overaccumulation of labor in enterprises, accumulation of an excess number of workers, while an increase in demand for labor leads to a shortage labor.
To reduce negative impact on the processes of forming the labor market and stabilizing its development, it is necessary to ensure a permanent increase in the quality of life and the quality of working life.
Improving the quality of life largely depends on the development of such spheres of society as education, healthcare, sports, culture, science, etc. This, in turn, should have a positive impact on the quality development of population reproduction and labor resources. At the national and regional levels, an important issue is the creation of a favorable investment climate for small and medium-sized businesses, ensuring the satisfaction of the material needs of society. The effective development of small and medium-sized businesses largely depends on ensuring the promotion of producers' products to other regions of the country.
LIST OF SOURCES USED:
1. Bulgakov M.S. From the best works. M.: ISOFAX, 1993. - 671 p.
2. Voronin V.P. Control human capital based on the process approach in the interests of innovative development [Text] / V.P. Voronin, O.V. Oseneva // FES: Finance. Economy. Strategy. – 2011. – No. 11. – P. 45-47.
3. Gimpelson V. Precarious employment and Russian market labor / V. Gimpelson, R. Kapelyushnikov. – M.: State University Higher School of Economics, 2005. – 316 p.
4. Gimpelson, V. Deficiency of qualifications and skills in the labor market / V. Gimpelson // Questions of Economics. - 2004. - No. 3. – P. 6
5. Gladarev, B. Labor strategies of “Soviet specialists” in the late 1990s / B. Gladarev // Questions of Economics. - 2004. - No. 12. – P. 144-151
6. Dashkova E.S. Personnel remuneration system based on a comprehensive assessment of its activities: diss. ...cand. Economic Sciences: 08.00.05 / Dashkova Ekaterina Sergeevna; [Place of protection: Voronezh. state university.]. – Voronezh, 2007. – 199 p.: ill. – RSL OD, 61: 07-8/5028.
7. Dashkova E.S. Modern personnel remuneration systems: monograph / E.S. Dashkova; Voronezh State University. – Voronezh: Voronezh State University Publishing House, 2010. – 112 p.
8. Demography of Russia. URL: >9. Eremov, O. Labor Code: new views on old norms / O. Eremov // Social policy and social partnership. - 2006. - No. 7. – P. 3-7
10. Kapelyushnikov, R. Mechanisms for the formation of wages in Russian industry/ R. Kapelyushnikov // Economic Issues. - 2004. - No. 4. – P. 65-82
11. Maksakovsky V.P. Geographical picture of the world. M.: Bustard, 2003. - 496 p.
12. Pavlenkov V.A. Labor market. Busy. Unemployment. M.: From Moscow. Unta, 2004. - 366 p.
13. Trade unions of the USSR. Documents and materials in 4 vols. 1905-1963 – M.: Profizdat, 1963. – T. 2: Trade unions during the period of building socialism in the USSR, October 1917-1937. P. 100.
14. Analysis of schools // Vedomosti. - 2002. - March 13.
15. Federal State Statistics Service. URL: >16. Khodorovsky I. The labor market in Russia in 1918 // Bulletin of the People's Commissariat of Labor. M., 1919. – Issue 26. P. 4-6.
17. Khrushchev A.T. Economic and social geography of Russia. M.: Bustard, 2001. - 672 p.

New translations

RUSSIAN LABOR MARKET1

Simon Clarke University of Warwick, UK

Translation by M.S. Dobryakova Scientific editing - V.V. Radaev

Labor market in Soviet period

The labor market was the only market that existed in the Soviet Union in a form that could be recognized in a capitalist economy (67, 68). Despite the intentions of the authorities to plan the distribution of labor and the insistence of almost all Soviet scientists that labor was not a commodity, in practice workers more or less freely changed jobs, and employers more or less freely hired whoever they wanted. Although wages were tightly controlled in an attempt to suppress competition in the labor market, employers in basic sectors of the economy were able to offer more high level wages, housing, and a wide and growing range of social benefits to attract selected workers. The least privileged industries could not compete using the same methods, i.e. offer better wages and benefits, but they could offer less intensive work hours, less strict work discipline, and more opportunities to earn extra money on the side by combining several jobs during the workday or simply by stealing public property. At the same time, wages for individual workers could be increased by assigning them higher ranks and categories or by weakening production standards. At the same time, those formal labor market institutions that ensure the process of changing jobs in developed capitalist economies did not exist. In Russia, by and large, people were forced to seek information about job vacancies through informal channels. However, before considering these informal channels, we should briefly outline the formal institutions that were supposed to regulate the movement of labor at the end of the Soviet period.

Distribution of labor force by administrative methods Entry into the labor market

Here, at the center of administrative regulation was a system of strict distribution of graduates after graduation from educational institutions. This

1 This text is a translation of part of the article Clarke, S. The Russian labor market // Aspects of social theory and modern society / Ed. A. Sogomonov, S. Kukhterin. M.: Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1999. P. 73-88 (73-120). The translation is posted with the kind consent of the author.

the system applied primarily to graduates of higher and secondary specialized educational institutions: they mandatory must work in the place assigned to them for three years. At the same time, the authorities expected that they would remain in this workplace for the rest of their lives. The distribution of graduates to jobs was carried out by the Distribution Commission operating at the educational institution. It was based on the wishes of the student, his academic achievements and social and political activity, as well as the specific requirements of employers who addressed the management of educational institutions. The best students or those who had good connections were often assigned by their own choice - for example, to the enterprise or organization where they completed their pre-graduate internship. Others were sent to remote regions of the country, primarily to Siberia and the Far East, where labor shortages persisted. However, in practice, this system never worked fully: some students found work themselves and simply did not show up where they were assigned; others went to the distribution site and discovered that there was no work available for them there; and still others left the places of distribution without waiting for the expiration of the three-year period (67, pp. 46-47). Since the 1980s the distribution system also extended to graduates of vocational schools. As a rule, these students were sent to the enterprise to which their vocational school was attached, although in practice, many found work here themselves. Local youth distribution commissions were supposed to find jobs for school leavers, but their effectiveness was highly controversial (68, p. 110).

Administrative distribution in the next stages

Although the country had a clear career ladder, in which personal connections played an important role, as well as professional and political qualities, its top positions were also filled through administrative means. The appointment of people to senior positions in all spheres of economic, social and political life was regulated by a nomenklatura system, under which party committees at all levels approved a list of persons suitable for promotion. From this list, candidates were selected when a vacant position arose (73). In principle, any party member could be ordered, in the interests of the party state, to move to another job, for example to travel to a remote region, which was common in the 1930s, but such a practice became quite rare in the post-Stalin period.

Other administrative methods of assigning people to jobs were based on material incentives and did not include a coercive component, so they should be considered market rather than administrative mechanisms (67, pp. 45-53). The organizational set arose in the early 1930s. on the initiative industrial enterprises who entered into agreements with collective farms for the supply of labor. Gradually, organizational recruitment was systemized and bureaucratized, and soon it turned into the main recruitment channel rural population to work in industry and construction at a time when villagers did not have the right to leave their place of residence. Since the 1950s. organizational recruitment was used primarily to attract labor to the developing regions of Siberia and the Far East. In this case, a contract was concluded with a specific employer for a period of one to five years (average duration - 2 years), he was allocated lifting costs and paid transportation costs. In the 1980s organizational recruitment covered 20% of the planned recruitment of workers for Siberia and the Far East, while almost a third went through the line

Ministry of Energy, while its share in the industry as a whole was not so large. Since no additional funds were allocated for family members in this case, most people hired in this way were single, and about two thirds of them were under 29 years of age. The same problems arose with organizational recruitment as with the distribution of graduates: many discovered that living and working conditions did not correspond to those promised; or people simply turned out to be unnecessary and left before the contract expired. There were also complaints that the organizational recruitment attracted far from the best workers, but only fliers jumping from place to place in hopes of lifting and covering transport costs(67, pp. 51-52). Patterns of settlement of people in rural areas were smaller in scale, but they provided for more substantial payments and allowed entire families to move (68, pp. 112-113).

Komsomol calls were initially introduced by N.S. Khrushchev with the aim of developing virgin lands; subsequently they were increasingly used to attract labor for large construction projects in the country. Although the terms of the contracts were more flexible than in the case of organizational recruitment, and the ideological load was much stronger, the material conditions were similar, and, as it turned out, people mobilized at the call of the Komsomol were not particularly eager to remain at their place of work after the end of the contract. Most students entered into short-term contracts, mainly to work on construction sites or in agriculture, primarily during the holidays.

Finally, it is important not to forget the important role that forced labor played throughout the Soviet era. Although mass repressions ended with the death of I.V. Stalin, a very large number of people were sentenced to certain terms of imprisonment in forced labor colonies. However, subsequently they were often charged with forced settlement in regions where there was a labor shortage. In addition, a huge number of army conscripts and military personnel were widely used: they worked for civilian objects or filled seasonal labor needs, such as harvesting crops or clearing streets of debris at the end of winter.

Labor mobility

According to the Soviet ideal, each individual was to be given a job according to his qualifications and the needs of the economy. It was assumed that he would subsequently make a career at the enterprise or organization to which he was sent, and appointment to senior positions would be controlled by the nomenklatura system. The reason for such a persistent desire to fix the employment structure was not so much the attempt of the planning authorities to control the distribution of labor (in practice, they could achieve this even market mechanisms), the central role assigned to the workplace in the process of maintaining order and stability of Soviet society.

The workplace was the main element of social integration within the Soviet system. And the party’s policy was aimed at securing people in their jobs: this made it easier to regulate and control their lives. At the same time, this ideal was carried out in practice, first of all, by providing enterprises with significant social benefits and privileges for length of service. The main place of work was not only a source of livelihood, but also an indicator of social status. Lack of work

condemned not only to material deprivation, but also to the risk of being imprisoned on charges of “parasitism.” The authorities did not encourage dismissal of even the most undisciplined workers as a means of control over the workforce, because those fired had to be sent to some other place of work. So the number of disciplinary dismissals was extremely small, although the management of the enterprise could force those who violated discipline to leave of their own free will.

This policy was also reflected in the subjective orientation of workers, which was based on the ideal: work for life, and workplace- "second house". The ideal work path for a Soviet worker was to find a suitable job and then remain there for the rest of his/her working life, making a career by moving from one position to another within the enterprise itself. If, however, there was a need to change jobs, this was done through a transfer agreed upon with the management of the enterprises and/or external organizations. Such a transfer allowed the employee to maintain continuous work experience and associated social benefits.

In practice, however, this did not work as intended because there was no effective mechanism to keep people in their jobs, with businesses and organizations always competing with each other for labor. Workers, especially in the early stages of their careers, sought better pay and working conditions, better prospects for housing and child care (67, pp. 280-282). As a result, the level of labor mobility was quite high. Thus, most of the hiring of workers took place outside of any administrative distribution of labor, but was carried out directly between the individual and the future employer. Moreover, approximately two-thirds were direct transfers from one job to another (67, p. 276).

There is very little data on staff turnover and the channels through which people found work in the Soviet system, since such information was considered a state secret and was not subject to publication until the end of the Soviet period. And the available data (primarily the data from research reports) are completely inconsistent with each other (for this kind of data, see 67, Chapter VI). As A. Kotlyar writes, 14.2% of the total number of employed in Russia in 1980 were graduates of educational institutions, 2.8% were young people, 3.8% were transferred, 0.9% were involved in organizational recruitment and resettlement of rural families, 0.5% - at the call of the Komsomol, and 77.8% were direct hiring of workers by enterprises (67, p. 269; 68, pp. 109-113; 61, p. 62).

This small proportion of administrative methods of assigning workers is the result of high labor turnover, which meant that the majority of all hires were people who moved at their own discretion from one job to another. Overall level of labor mobility in the Soviet Union since the 1960s. was comparable to those for capitalist labor markets: turnover was approximately 20% per year and fell to approximately 15% in the mid-1980s. These figures are similar to those for many European countries; they are higher than in Japan and significantly lower than in the United States2. However, the Soviet reverent attitude towards high

2 Official data show that since the mid-1970s. significant

The level of labor mobility becomes quite understandable if we place it in the context of employment dynamics, on the one hand, and social norms, on the other. The “extensive” path assumed a rigid employment structure; jobs were eliminated extremely rarely, since the creation of new industries was not accompanied by the liquidation of old ones production capacity. Thus, very few people were forced to leave their jobs as a result of retrenchment, and even fewer as a result of disciplinary dismissals. Likewise, centralized determination of wage levels did not put pressure on workers in depressed industries by reducing the relative level of this wage. On the other hand, strong social norms supported employment stability. A high level of labor mobility was characteristic, as a rule, primarily of young workers who were looking for a more suitable place of work, as well as the least socialized and least disciplined workers, who also usually had lower qualifications. However, persistent labor shortages meant unemployment was low, and those who left their jobs were confident that they would find another job as soon as they chose. Despite the curbs on labor mobility, workers had sufficient freedom to change jobs in accordance with their own interests and preferences.

Personnel turnover was viewed by the Soviet authorities not only from the point of view of negative social consequences, but also how serious economic problem, waste of resources. Workers left the jobs for which they were trained and went to new jobs, where they again needed time to prepare. At the same time, the break between work at the old and new places was approximately one month (67, p. 306316). Accordingly, there have been quite a lot of studies devoted to the reasons for high employee turnover. The objective of these studies was to identify ways to improve the system of wages and bonuses, as well as change working conditions that would reduce labor mobility. Ideas about labor mobility as a positive phenomenon were also absent among economists, who did not consider it as a means of increasing labor productivity, achieved by better matching the worker with his place of work. They are also absent among workers who could not consider it as a means of constructing a fulfilling working life. Consequently, labor market institutions such as those found in the West were very underdeveloped, and labor mobility was never explored as a tool for economic restructuring or as an element of workers' employment strategies.

reduction in the labor turnover rate (it subsequently began to rise from 11% of industrial workers in 1986 to 13% in 1989 (26, p. 126) and to approximately 30% in 1992). Soviet commentators explained such a sharp drop in the turnover rate in the first half of the 1980s. successful implementation of a number of measures to improve labor discipline and reduce turnover, which followed the official announcement in December 1979. Western commentators were more skeptical about the effectiveness of these measures, which included, for example, the following: the consideration of applications for resignation was extended by 2-4 weeks. Partly due to the decline in turnover rates in the mid-1980s. can be explained by the aging of the workforce (68, p. 217), as well as, probably, by Yu.V. Andropov’s short campaign to tighten labor discipline (67, p. 315; 61, p. 63).

In practice, the central authorities sought to regulate the labor market through market rather than administrative mechanisms. Higher wages were paid to workers in remote regions where labor was scarce and in basic industries where greater social benefits were also offered. This gave basic industries, and above all, the military-industrial complex, a great advantage in the labor market, which made it possible to attract the best workers and have a stable personnel composition. The flip side of this situation was that lower priority sectors, including the service sector, light industry and construction experienced more difficulties in attracting labor and higher labor turnover (68, p. 217; 62). Changes in social policy, which occurred since the mid-1980s, were aimed at securing the worker in the enterprise, providing him with housing and providing a wider range of social benefits and benefits tied to a given workplace. However, as a result, wealthier enterprises received more advantageous positions in the labor market. Survey data showed huge differences in turnover rates among different enterprises in the same industry, thereby reflecting the extent of competition between enterprises in the labor market. Higher turnover was also found in major cities, in smaller enterprises, as well as among younger and lower-paid workers (67, pp. 275-276).

Intermediaries in the labor market

Despite the fact that most of all hiring of workers was done without administrative control, during almost the entire Soviet period there were formal intermediaries in the labor market, engaged, in particular, in the placement of youth and such special categories as disabled people demobilized from the army and released from prison. places of detention. Only in 1969, in order to improve the efficiency of the labor market, labor exchanges were re-established (in 1930 they were abolished due to the official announcement of the elimination of unemployment). In the period between these two events, the company was fully responsible for the employment of dismissed workers, as well as for the payment of compensation for two weeks after dismissal. By 1970, 134 employment bureaus had been established, and by 1989, 812 employment centers and 2,000 employment bureaus had emerged throughout the Soviet Union. However, for a number of reasons, such bureaus turned out to be ineffective. First, ironically, unlike most capitalist countries, these institutions did not receive state support, but had to finance their activities through deductions from enterprises, which led to underfunding and problems with personnel (67, pp. 24, 406-407). Second, many businesses did not report their vacancies, and most of the reported jobs were for low-skilled workers. Third, these bureaus had a very low reputation and were the last resort of people who despaired of finding work on their own, and businesses that could not fill empty jobs. However, according to their own reports, these bureaus soon began to play a decisive role in the process of labor distribution, accounting for more than 20% of all hiring in Russia in 1981. They significantly reduced the time gap in moving from one job to another, ensuring in 1973, 87% of those who wanted information about jobs were provided with information and 59% actually found jobs (68, pp. 115-116). According to our own data, these bureaus and their successors, as we will see below, played a much larger role in the labor market.

less significant role. Labor market policy

Throughout Soviet times, labor market policy was subordinated to the primary task of mobilizing labor reserves for the needs of building Soviet industry. In the 1930s it was necessary to relocate, largely by force, a large proportion of the rural population to new centers of processing and mining industries. After Stalin's death, the emphasis gradually shifted to the use of material incentives to attract the rural population into industry and construction, but by the end of the 1950s. It had already become clear that the influx of workers (including women) from agriculture, which played an auxiliary role, into the army of hired labor, as well as the natural increase in the urban population, was not enough to satisfy the insatiable demand of the Soviet system for labor. During the 1960s and 1970s. The attraction of the non-working population, consisting primarily of pensioners and women with children, played an increasingly important role. Restrictions on the employment of pensioners were gradually relaxed, and by the end of the Soviet period, pensioners could receive a full pension even if they continued to work, subject to a certain “ceiling” of maximum total income3. Likewise, child care benefits have become widespread and women have gained new rights regarding maternity leave. All these measures had a noticeable impact on attracting these two categories of workers into the labor force (67, pp. 106-107, 218-225). At the same time, they contradicted the goals of social and demographic policy, which especially concerned the employment of women with children. A dramatic illustration of the state of affairs was the high level of infant mortality and the sharp decline in the birth rate.

Since the 1980s. Soviet specialists switched attention from the labor shortage on the external labor market to the surplus of labor employed in existing enterprises. This led to debate about the extent to which Soviet enterprises fed large domestic reserves of labor that could be mobilized to meet the demands of ongoing economic growth (this debate is discussed in detail in ). The theoretical problem was the apparent coexistence of labor shortages at the macro level and labor surpluses at the micro level. The phenomenon of "overemployment" was explained by the shortcomings of the planning system, which gave enterprises an incentive to maximize the workforce and which required them to hold back a significant part of the workforce as a reserve in case of changing needs4. The reason was also seen in the imperfection of the strategy

3 Pensioners in Russia can be quite young. It's not just that pension

The age here is five years lower than in most countries (55 years for women and 60 for men), but also in the fact that many workers have the right to early retirement due to harmful or difficult working conditions. An underground miner, for example, can retire after 20 years of service. These “privileges” are balanced by low life expectancy, especially for men, and the widespread incidence of accidents and illnesses at work.

4 Such needs included the right of local authorities to call upon a significant proportion of the workforce

forces from local enterprises to meet any short-term needs. They widely used this right, especially in the case of harvesting, construction, and also

capital investment, where the emphasis on primary production has led to an extremely low level of mechanization of auxiliary labor; as well as in the incompetence of managers, which led to ineffective use of labor within the enterprise.

Attempts were made to eradicate the shortcomings of the planning system through a series of "experiments" carried out starting in the mid-1960s. It was proposed to give enterprises and organizations an incentive to reduce the number of employees by retaining for them the funds saved as a result of increasing labor productivity. As is the case with all other Soviet “campaigns,” such experiments gave good results at advanced enterprises in the short term, however, due to system failures, it was not possible to maintain a significant impact of the experiments in the long term (1; 68, pp. 169-81 ; 67, pp. 161-71). There was an underlying tension between the integrity of the administrative-command system, which required the center to maintain control over the distribution of resources, and the need to encourage initiative in the acquisition and management of resources.

By the mid-1980s. It became generally known that the Soviet economy had a surplus of 10-15% of the labor force, but the sources of such data were never cited (67, p. 154). Since the view that labor shortages were a Soviet invention and that labor shortages were an integral feature of Soviet enterprises has become common among post-Soviet analysts, it is important to clarify what is meant by these internal surpluses. Survey data consistently showed that the vast majority of enterprises faced labor shortages, and this proved to be a significant obstacle to achieving the plan. On the other hand, survey data also showed that after implementing systemic reforms - such as changing the planning system, improving the management system and improving the reliability of supplies - many enterprises could meet production targets using much less labor. A more rational investment program, including the dismantling of outdated factories and the mechanization of auxiliary and auxiliary labor, would save even more labor (68, pp. 19-20, 151160). Thus, there is no evidence that there was a significant surplus of labor in the sense that enterprises and organizations accumulated labor reserves that could be freed up without any effort for more efficient use. This is true only in the sense that there was an extremely wide range of ways to increase labor productivity through management reform and more rational capital investment programs (see 8, 52). This served as the basis for a series of reforms during the era of perestroika, the essence of which was the release of internal labor reserves based on an increasingly radical transformation of the administrative-command system. The result of these attempts was the rapid disintegration of the system, when the center lost control over the distribution of resources, which had previously formed the basis

repair of municipal buildings and roads. According to published data, during the 1980s. in the Soviet Union, such tasks absorbed 700-800,000 man-years per year (68, p. 113). This figure, however, is clearly a significant underestimate, since a significant part of this kind of labor mobilization was carried out informally and, therefore, was not officially registered.

his power over enterprises and organizations (12). The impact of perestroika on the Soviet labor market

this work does not intend to cover all the turns and leaps of perestroika; it only touches on its impact on the Soviet labor market (68, chapters 9 and 10; 67, chapter VIII). The fundamental elements of the reform program from the point of view of labor market development were the wage reform of 1986 and the Self-Employment Act, which was combined with a renewed fight against unearned income; Public Enterprise Act 1987; Cooperatives Act 1988 and Tenancy Act 1989; finally, the expansion of the activities of the Employment Bureau and the introduction of unemployment benefits in 1988.

The main goal of the wage reform was a closer link between wages and labor productivity, increasing the independence of enterprises and institutions in setting the level of wages and its differentiation depending on the dynamics of labor productivity, with a subsequent reduction in the workforce (21). The reform was first introduced on an experimental basis in the Belarusian railway in 1985-86, where it decisively influenced the level of wages, employment and labor productivity - and as a result was extended to the entire Soviet transport system5. The widespread implementation of wage reform required radical changes in the relationship between enterprises and the ministries above them - changes that would give enterprises greater independence in determining the number of employees and managing own income. These changes occurred in 1987, when the State Enterprise Law was adopted.

It was expected that the reforms would lead to massive layoffs, but it was assumed that the subsequent regrouping of the workforce would help avoid unemployment, which continued to be considered an unacceptable phenomenon throughout the entire period of perestroika. In order to facilitate the employment of the displaced workforce, in 1988 the Employment Bureau was given significant powers. Enterprises and organizations were now obliged to inform them about all their vacancies, as well as upcoming layoffs (the sanctions, however, were insignificant). Central services received new rights to coordinate staff retraining (although the costs had to be covered by the new employer), as well as provide advice on choosing a profession. The entitlement to redundant workers' benefits (paid by the employer) has been increased from the previous two weeks' salary to two months' salary. At the same time, those who registered with the employment center within two weeks from the date of layoffs continued to be paid monthly allowance. The powers of the Employment Office were further expanded by the Employment Act 1991, which for the first time recognized the existence of unemployment and established Federal service employment financed by compulsory

5 These improvements had little to do with wage reform. A third of all job cuts in Belarus were attributed to additional capital investment, more than half to labor intensification through revised standards and employment reductions, and one-eighth to management rationalization. One-fifth of those who lost their jobs were re-employed in the railroad system, 40% retired, and 40% found work in other industries (67, p. 395).

deductions linked to the wage fund of enterprises. According to the new Law, unemployment benefits were to be paid through employment services; it was in addition to the redundancy compensation that the enterprise provided under the previous law. The law provided employment services with a wide range of new opportunities, including training and retraining, financing the maintenance and creation of jobs, and public works.

There has been much debate regarding the role that wage reform has played. Everyone, however, agrees that she did not live up to the expectations placed on her. According to Soviet experts, 2.3 million jobs were eliminated by July 1988 due to this reform. However, 13% of such cases are explained by the elimination of unfilled vacancies, 35% are the movement of personnel to vacant positions within an enterprise or organization, 1 7% are the retirement of workers who have reached retirement age, and the remaining third, or 800 thousand workers, i.e. . less than 1% of the workforce looked for work elsewhere. In other words, the wage reform explained, at best, only 10% of the total turnover in the year of its implementation (68, p. 252).

In fact, it turned out that legislation on new forms of labor activity had a much greater impact than the wage reform or the Law on State Enterprise. Individual labor activity has always existed legally in the form of peasant subsidiary farming and illegally in the form of providing a wide range of services to the population. By the 1980s subcontracting work carried out by independent teams of workers (shabashniks) has become widespread, primarily in the field of construction in rural regions (68, pp. 113114; 67, pp. 363-374). Self-employment, cooperative, and tenancy laws not only provided individuals with the ability to legally sell the products of their individual or collective labor, but more importantly, they provided businesses and organizations with a loophole through which they could escape centralized controls over wages and employment by concluding contracts with formally independent cooperatives and rental enterprises, as well as avoiding control over them financial activities, establishing formally independent "pocket banks". It was these reforms that broke the system of administrative control over wages and employment and acted as a stimulating factor in the significant increase in staff turnover in the late 1980s.

The immediate impact of perestroika on the Soviet labor market was relatively limited. A number of changes took place in the legal or administrative sphere regarding the distribution and re-absorption of labor. There were no significant changes in the structure of the labor force. There was a subtle tendency to redistribute labor from the sphere of material production to the service sector. There was a more significant increase in staff turnover, which was probably more a consequence of new opportunities in the nascent private sector than the impact of pay reform or the greater independence granted state enterprises. The role of the Labor Employment Bureau increased, employment growth began to be controlled, but the unemployment rate did not increase significantly, since reductions in production were compensated by the departure of some pensioners from the labor market. However, the erosion and then the collapse of the administrative-command system, which forced a rapid transition to a market economy, led to significant changes in the structure

wages and employment, resulting in increased levels of labor mobility as workers responded to changing market conditions.

Literature

1. Arnot, B. Controlling Soviet Labor. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1988.

2. Ashwin, S. The Anatomy of Patience. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999.

3. Brainerd, E. Winners and Losers in Russia's Economic Transition. American

4. Economic Review 88, 1998. Pp. 1094-116.

5. Brown, A.N. The Economic Determinants of Internal Migration Flows in Russia During Transition, 1997, cited in Grogan, 1997.

6. Brown, W., Marginson, P. and Walsh, J. Management: Pay Determination and Collective Bargaining in Edwards, P.K. (ed.) Industrial Relations: theory and practice in Britain. Oxford: Blackwell Business, 1995.

7. Brown, W. and Nolan, P. Wages and Labor Productivity: The Contribution of Industrial Relations Research to the Understanding of Pay Determination. British Journal of Industrial Relations 26, 1988. Pp. 339-61.

8. Clarke, S. Labor Relations in Transition. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1996b.

9. Clarke, S. Structural Adjustment without Mass Unemployment. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1998a.

10. Clarke, S. and Kabalina, V. The New Private Sector in the Russian Labor Market. Europe-Asia Studies 52, 1, 2000.

11. Clarke, S. and Metalina, T. Training in the New Private Sector in Russia. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2000.

12. Clarke, S., Borisov, V. and Fairbrother, P. “The Workers" Movement in Russia. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1995.

13. Clarke, S., Fairbrother, P., Burawoy, M. and Krotov, P. What about the Workers? Workers and the Transition to Capitalism in Russia. London: Verso, 1993.

14. Commander, S., Tolstopiatenko, A. and Yemtsov, R. Channels of Redistribution: Inequality and Poverty in the Russian Federation. Inequality and Poverty in Transition Economies. London: EBRD, 1997.

15. Commander, S., Dhar, S. and Yemtsov, R. How Russian Firms Make Their Wage and Employment Decisions in Commander, S., Fan, Q. and Schaffer, M.E. (eds.) Enterprise Restructuring and Economic Policy in Russia. Washington D.C.: The World Bank, 1996.

16. Commander, S., McHale, J. and Yemtsov, R. Russia in Commander, S. and Coricelli, F. (eds.) Unemployment, Restructuring and the Labor Market in Eastern Europe and Russia. Washington DC: The World Bank, (1995).

17. Davis, S.J. andHaltiwanger, J. Wage Dispersion Between and Within US Manufacturing Plants, 1963-86. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Microeconomics, 1991. Pp. 11580.

18. Doeringer, P.B. and Piore, M.J. Internal Labor Markets and Manpower Analysis. Lexington: Heath, 1971.

19. Donova, I. Wage systems in pioneers of privatization in Clarke, S. (ed.) Labor in Transition: Wages, Employment and Labor Relations in Russian Industrial Enterprises. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1996.

20. Earle, J. and Sabirianova, K. Understanding Wage Arrears in Russia, SITE Working Paper No. 139, Stockholm School of Economics, 1999.

21. Fevre, R "Informal Practices, Flexible Firms and Private Labor Markets". Sociology 23, 1989. Pp. 91-109.

22. Filtzer, D. Soviet Workers and Perestroika. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

23. Gaddy, C. and Ickes, B. Russia's Virtual Economy. Foreign Affairs 77, 1998. Pp. 53-67.

24. Gerber, T.P. and Hout, M. More Shock than Therapy: Market Transition, Employment and Income in Russia, 1991-1995. American Journal of Sociology 104, 1998.

25. Gimpel'son, V. and Lippoldt, D. Labor Turnover in Russia: Evidence from the Administrative Reporting of Enterprises in Four Regions Transition Economics Series No. 4. Vienna: Institute for Advanced Studies, 1999.

26. Goskomstat RSFSR (1990). Narodnoe khozyaistvo RSFSR v 1989 g. Moscow: Respublikanskii informatsionno-izdatel"skii tsentr.

27. Goskomstat Trud i zanyatost" v Rossii. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii, 1995 c.

28. Goskomstat "O differentsiyatsii zarabotnoi platy rabotayushchikh na predpriyatiyakh (organizatsiyakh) v 1 polugodii 1996 year". Information statisticheskii byuulleten" 13, 1996b. Pp.65-82.

29. Goskomstat "Rynok labor Rossiiskoi federatsii v 1996 godu". Information statisticheskii byuulleten" 13, 1996d. Pp. 45-64.

30. Goskomstat "Organizatsiya obsledovanii naseleniya po problemam zanyatosti (obsledovanii rabochei sily) v rossiiskoi federatsii." Voprosy statistiki 5, 1997a. pp. 27-38.

31. Goskomstat "O raspredelenii rabotayushchikh po razmeram zarabotnoi platy v 1997 godu". Statisticheskii byulleten" 2(41): (1998b). 70-96.

32. Goskomstat "O zanyatosti naseleniya". Statisticheskii byulleten" 9(48), 1998 pp. 59-156.

33. Goskomstat Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii, 1998 e.

34. Goskomstat "O zanyatosti naseleniya". Statisticheskii byulleten" 3(53), 1999a. Pp. 5-141.

35. Goskomstat Russia v Tsifrakh. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii., 1999b.

36. Goskomstat Sotsialnoe polozhenie i uroven" zhizni naseleniya Rossii 1998. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii. (1999c).

37. Granovetter, M. The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology 78 (May), 1973. Pp. 1360-80.

39. Grimshaw, D. and Rubery, J. Integrating the internal and external labor markets. Cambridge Journal of Economics 22, 1998. Pp. 199-220.

40. Grogan, L. Wage Dispersion in Russia. Amsterdam: Tinbergen Institute, mimeo, 1997.

41. Groshen, E.L. Sources of Intra-Industry Wage Dispersion: How Much for Employers

Matter?. Quarterly Journal of Economics 106, 1991. Pp. 869-84.

42. Gudkov, L.D. Kharakteristiki respondentov, otkazyvayushchikhsya or kontaktov with intervyuerami. VTsIOM: Economic i sotsial "nye peremeny: monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: 45-8, 1996.

43. Healey, N.N., Leksin, V. and Svetov, A. Privatization and enterprise-owned social assets. Russian Economic Barometer 2, 1998. Pp. 18-38.

44. Ickes, B. and Ryterman, R. From Enterprise to Firm: Notes for a Theory of the Enterprise in Transition in Grossman, G. (ed.) The Post-Communist Economic Transformation. Boulder: Westview Press, 1994.

45. Ilyin, V. “Social contradictions and conflicts in Russian state enterprises in the transition period” in Clarke, S. (ed.) Conflict and Change in the Russian Industrial Enterprise. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1996.

46. IMF/World Bank/OECD "A Study of the Soviet Economy, 3 volumes", 1991.

47. Jenkins, R., Bryman, A., Ford, J., Keil, T. and Beardsworth, A. Information in the Labor Market: the Impact of Recession. Sociology 17, 1983. Pp. 260-7.

48. Jenkins, S.P. Accounting for Inequality Trends: Decomposition Analyzes for the UK, 1971-86. Economica 62, 1995. pp. 29-63.

49. Kabalina, V. and Ryzhykova, Z. Statistika i praktika nepolnoi zanyatost" v Rossii (Short-time Working in Russia). Voprosy ekonomiki 2, 1998. Pp. 131-43.

50. Kapelyushnikov, R. Job Turnover in a Transitional Economy. Labor Market Dynamics in the Russian Federation. Paris: OECD/CEET, 1997.

51. Kapelyushnikov, R. Job Turnover in a Transitional Economy. Labor Market Dynamics in the Russian Federation. Paris: OECD/CEET, 1997.

52. Kapelyushnikov, R. Overemployment in Russian Industry: Roots of the Problem and Lines of Attack. Studies on Russian Economic Development 9, 1998. Pp. 596-609.

53. Kapelyushnikov, R. Rossiiskii rynok truda: adaptatsiya bez restrukturizatsii. Moscow: IMEMO, 1999.

54. Korovkin, A.G. and Parbuzin, K.V. Evaluation of Structural Unemployment in Russia. Russian Economic Barometer 2, 1998. Pp. 13-17.

55. Kotlyar, A. Sistema trudoustroistva v SSSR. Economic sciences 3, 1984.

56. Kruger, A.B. and Summers, L.H. Efficiency Wages and the Inter-Industry Wage Structure. Econometrica 56, 1988. Pp. 259-93.

57. Layard, R., Nickell, S. and Jackman, R. Unemployment: Macroeconomic Performance and the Labor Market. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.

58. Leontaridi, M.R. Segmented Labor Markets: Theory and Evidence. Journal of Economic Surveys 12, 1998. Pp. 63-101.

59. Linz, S.J. Russian Labor Market in Transition. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 1995. Pp. 693-716.

60. Magun, V. Rossiiskie trudovye tsennosti: ideologiya i massovoe soznanie. Mir Rossii 4, 1998. Pp. 113-44.

480 rub. | 150 UAH | $7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Dissertation - 480 RUR, delivery 10 minutes, around the clock, seven days a week and holidays

240 rub. | 75 UAH | $3.75 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Abstract - 240 rubles, delivery 1-3 hours, from 10-19 (Moscow time), except Sunday

Onishchenko Alexander Vasilievich. Socio-economic prerequisites for the development of the Russian labor market in transition period: Dis. ...cand. geogr. Sciences: 25.00.24: Krasnodar, 2003 170 p. RSL OD, 61:04-11/109

Introduction

1. Theory and methodology of the labor market 7

1.1. Conceptual apparatus 7

1.2. Socio-economic laws of labor market formation 12

2. Transition period of the Russian labor market 15

2.1. Features of the formation of the labor market in the USSR-Russia in the Soviet and transition periods 15

2.2. Social and economic consequences policy is complete and not full employment 49

2.3. Intersectoral and territorial redistribution of labor 80

3. Labor market segmentation 84

3.1. External and internal labor markets 84

3.2. Problems of labor market integration in the CIS countries 90

4. Territorial problems of formation modern market labor in

Russian Federation 105

4.1 Regional conditions and labor market development factors 105

4.2. Problems of zoning the territory of Russia according to the level of development of the labor market 115

Conclusion 135

Bibliography 137

Applications

Introduction to the work

Processes of transition to the market, the collapse of production and economic ties had an extremely painful impact on the state of the labor market. Mass unemployment arose, which was unknown to generations of the labor force of the former USSR. To this should be added the distrust of the market economy, which has been fostered by the ideologists of socialism for 75 years. Lack of management experience also played a role new system relations that developed between employee and employer, outright predation in the process of redistribution of state property, vouchers, etc. the search began for a market model that would meet the current specific conditions in the Russian Federation. The first works proposed American, Japanese, and Swedish models as basic models, but in Russia there were no appropriate psychological or socio-economic conditions for the implementation of any of them. The named models have evolved over centuries, are perceived by the population as the only possible ones, and Russia’s creation of such conditions in 10-15 years was just the good intention of the ideologists of reforming socio-economic relations. Most of the work devoted to the labor market focused on emerging difficulties and those problems that hampered the search for and formation of a new model during the transition period.

In most published works, the connection of times was omitted. But it is well known that the past development experience tenaciously retained former priorities in the minds of the bulk of the labor force and rejected the positive perception of the new market model, especially in connection with such phenomena as unemployment, unknown in the former USSR, as non-payment of wages for years, as indefinite leaves without pay , such as payment for labor with the products of your enterprise or barter, etc. This could not but affect the successful search for a new model of the labor market in the Russian version, taking into account Russian reality.

The research I carried out is devoted to a retrospective analysis of the development of the labor market in Russia - the USSR, an analysis of the socio-economic conditions of its formation during market reforms, the role of labor in the development of modern production, and an analysis of territorial differences in the levels and causes of unemployment. In addition, the work contains an analytical review of publications devoted to the problem under study. Object of study is the Russian Federation and its regions.

The subject of the study is the emerging labor market and its regional

peculiarities.

Goal of the work: study of socio-economic and demographic

prerequisites for the formation of the Russian labor market in modern conditions and him

regional modifications.

Achieving this goal required solving the following tasks

theoretical and applied nature:

perform a retrospective analysis of the state of the labor market and the main provisions of employment policy in Russia - the USSR;

perform an analytical review of the principles and recommendations for the formation of the labor market in modern Russia, published in the scientific press;

explore the role and quality of labor in modern production;

conduct an analysis of the system of reproduction, training and retraining of qualified personnel in modern Russia;

explore the processes of territorial and intersectoral redistribution of labor resources and the role of migration processes in ensuring the demand for labor;

development of methodological and methodological foundations for zoning the Russian labor market and drawing up corresponding thematic maps.

Theoretical and methodological basis The dissertation was based on the works of both domestic and foreign scientists. But in to a greater extent the emphasis was on domestic sources, since foreign scientists do not always take a critical and impartial approach to posing the question of the problems of the Russian labor market. Among domestic researchers of the Russian labor market, the works of E. Ruzavina, V. Kostakov, B. Breev, I. Bushmarin, E. Balatsky, E. Vilkhovchenko, N. Vishnevskaya, N. Gauzner, N. Chugunova, R. Kapelyushnikov, V. stand out. Gimpelson and others.

Various factors and conditions for the development of the Krasnodar Territory and the Southern Federal District were highlighted in the works of G. Guzhin, M. Belikov, V. Tyurin, V. Chistyakov, V. Belozerov. S. Voskoboynikova and others. The methodology of this study is based on general scientific methods - descriptive, statistical, systematic, and also cartographic. Scientific novelty dissertation research is that the presented dissertation is one of the few works devoted to

economic and geographical aspects of the formation and problems of the Russian labor market in retrospect. The dissertation is the first to explore regional modifications of the labor market, provide a critical analysis of published principles and strategies for the formation of the labor market during the transition period, and analyze the characteristics of the reproduction of the labor force, training and retraining of qualified personnel. A methodology for zoning the country's territory according to the nature and levels of development of the labor market has been developed and applied. The following are submitted for defense: provisions."

The process of creating new basic foundations for the formation of a market economy in general and the labor market in post-Soviet Russia in particular will be long and difficult. In addition to the processes associated with the redistribution of property and the introduction of a clear economic strategy, the formation of economic structures capable of successfully competing with foreign companies in an open economy, it is still necessary to overcome the syndrome of ideological heritage, past goals, principles and priorities, and a rather acute rejection of new ideas and values by a significant part of the working population. The process of adaptation of the population to new realities, its duration will depend on how quickly society eliminates ugly social differentiation, unemployment, draconian tariffs and a clear tendency to skew the sectoral structure of the economy towards primary industries.

The study confirmed the fact noted in science that the extensive development of the economy for the sake of the political goal of achieving full employment leads to slow processes of introducing scientific and technological progress into production and modernizing the industrial structure, a slow increase in the level of material living of the population, but more or less sustainable saves social structure, its apparent homogeneity and weak differentiation.

The completed study allows us to assert that during the period of economic reform, phenomena arose in the Russian labor market that did not take place during the implementation of reforms similar in nature to Russian ones in other developed countries (post-war reforms in Germany and Japan). Among these anomalous phenomena, it should be noted: maintaining the number of employees even in those enterprises where relatively

the production process was completely stopped for a long time; going on practically indefinite leave without official dismissal and loss of the right to return to the previous workplace; payment of labor with the products of one’s own enterprise, or through barter received in payment for sold products with subsequent sale on the market by the employee himself. And other anomalies that became widespread during the period of privatization of state property. Of particular interest during this period was the tendency of enterprises to get rid of the most qualified personnel. It seemed that the production did not need highly qualified specialists. The reason really lay in the fact that at a time when production was either barely warm or stopped, it was possible to do without a large number of qualified specialists. On the other hand, their dismissal was dictated by another consideration: during the division of property, these were serious competitors of the enterprise administrations, who knew their worth, and they tried to get rid of them quickly.

The study revealed certain similarities in the processes of formation of the labor market in Russia with similar processes in a number of foreign countries: the most energetic and highly qualified part of the labor force emigrated to more the developed countries and at the same time, a compensatory flow of able-bodied migrants to Russia arose from countries where problems and employment are even more acute than in Russia.

The study confirmed the fear that already in the next decade of the 21st century in Russia there will be serious difficulties in providing the economy with labor resources. An aging population, low birth rates, negative natural growth, the increasing role of primary industries in the economy with their increased demand for muscles and gray collar workers, imperfect migration laws and labor legislation are the main problems that require urgent solutions in the highest spheres of management.

In the dissertation, the author proposes his own version of the methodology for identifying regions according to the nature of labor market development. When identifying regions, I used a combination of indicators such as the unemployment rate, the structure of sectoral employment, the rate of humanization of labor and the level of technical development.

Conceptual apparatus

Before moving on to the analysis of the labor market and the processes influencing its transformation, it is necessary to dwell on the basic concepts that make up the labor market itself. Among such concepts, the main ones can be identified: economically active population, labor resources, labor, unemployment, working time, wages, employment (full and part-time), etc. Many of these concepts were developed at the beginning and middle of the last century, but until now have not lost their relevance. The concepts were taken from the Great Soviet Encyclopedia.

Economically active population, part of the population employed in the national economy (including those employed in personal subsidiary agriculture). In the conditions of the USSR, and then Russia, this is the totality of all those engaged in paid or socially useful work that provides income. The share of the economically active population depends on the share in the structure of the entire population of working age (demographic factor) and on the degree of their employment (organizational-economic factor); in some countries it ranges from 35 to 50% of the total population. For the male part of the population it is always higher than for the female part.

Labor resources, part of the country's population that has the necessary physical development, knowledge and practical experience to work in the national economy. The labor force includes both employed and potential workers. The overwhelming majority of the country's labor force is made up of people of working age (men from 16 to 60 years old, women from 16 to 55 years old). Changes in the number of labor resources depend on the natural movement of the population - its birth and death rates. Other things being equal, rapid population growth corresponds to fast growth labor resources and vice versa. Labor is the purposeful activity of a person, during which he, with the help of tools of labor, influences nature and uses it to create use values necessary to satisfy needs. The labor process is not only the impact of people on nature. In order to produce material goods, people enter into certain connections and relationships among themselves - production relations. The nature of the latter determines the social nature of labor, because with changes in forms of ownership, there is a change in the ways of connecting labor power with the means of production.

Working time - in a broad sense - time that serves as a measure for assessing labor costs. Working time is the time of participation in labor activity, measured by the duration of a working day, week, month or year. Irregular working hours, a working time regime that allows, in some cases, to involve persons (for whom such a regime is established) to work beyond normal working hours; Such work is not considered overtime. Irregular working hours are established: for persons whose work does not always fit within normal working hours - for managers of enterprises and institutions, workshops and departments, chief specialists, craftsmen, engineers, technicians, dispatchers, as well as innovators and creative people; for persons for whom accurate recording of working time is impossible - commodity experts, freight forwarders, supply workers, etc. Wages are a converted form of value, or price, of a specific product - labor power. The cost of labor power is determined by the labor socially necessary for its reproduction, that is, the cost of a certain amount of means of subsistence necessary for the reproduction of labor power, namely: food, clothing, housing, costs of training and acquiring qualifications, as well as maintaining the worker’s family. There is also the concept of real wages, wages expressed in material goods and services; shows how many consumer goods and services a worker can actually buy with his wages.

Employment - participation of the population in work activities, including study, military service, housekeeping, care for children and the elderly.

IN economic science employment is described by a system of indicators reflecting:

Complete inclusion of the active part of the population in social production;

Level of balance of jobs and labor resources;

Compliance of employment with the socio-economic needs of the population.

There are also flexible forms of employment, forms of employment of labor, based on the use of non-standard organizational and legal conditions for the employment of workers. Flexible forms of employment include:

Employment associated with flexible working hours;

Employment related to the social status of workers:

Self-employed workers and supporting family members;

Employment in jobs with non-standard jobs and labor organization: home work, on-call workers, rotational and expeditionary uniforms;

Employment in non-standard organizational forms: temporary workers, seasonal workers.

The labor market is the sphere of formation of demand and supply for labor. Through the labor market, labor power is sold for a certain period.

The labor market is characterized by the concept of unemployment; this is when some workers cannot find a job, becoming a “surplus” population, a reserve army of labor.

There are several types of unemployment: Involuntary unemployment - unemployment caused by the lack of jobs that meet the qualifications of unemployed specialists. The source of involuntary unemployment is sticky or rigid wages, which disrupt the mechanism of supply and demand for labor. The types of involuntary unemployment are: technological, structural and cyclical unemployment.

Voluntary unemployment is unemployment caused by the fact that part of the labor force is unwilling to work for a wage rate that is low compared to unemployment benefits and social benefits. Institutional unemployment is unemployment generated by labor market institutions and factors influencing the demand and supply of labor.

Institutional unemployment is caused by:

Imperfection of the tax system;

The introduction of a guaranteed minimum wage;

Inertia of the labor market;

Imperfect information about available jobs. Marginal unemployment is the unemployment of vulnerable segments of the population: youth, women, and disabled people.

Residual unemployment is the unemployment of individual able-bodied citizens who cannot find an economically viable place to work, even in conditions of full employment.

Regional unemployment is a socio-economic situation in a certain region in which part of the working-age population cannot find work.

Features of the formation of the labor market in the USSR-Russia in the Soviet and transition periods

From a modern perspective, the employment of workers during the Soviet period looks twofold. On the one hand, unemployment was one hundred percent absent, and workers had a full package of social benefits and guarantees. But on the other hand, the absence of mass unemployment, which was considered one of our main achievements, was not the result of a balance between demand and supply of labor, but only a consequence of the high labor intensity of production, an artificially maintained shortage of personnel, and a backward structure of production. Wages and pensions were subject to general equalization and if there were any differences, they were insignificant. Also, a huge part of government spending went to the development of the military-industrial complex and a huge part of the population worked for the military-industrial complex. Now this can be seen as a negative process, but it was a defensive reaction of the Soviet state to external aggression. Since, in essence, the USSR was the first socialist country in the world and was a class threat to capitalist countries. Therefore, the USSR fell under the “Iron Curtain” and development occurred without external competition, and this also did not have a positive effect on the development of production. Our country is huge in its territory and to manage it competently you need to know all the territorial nuances. But very often, orders came from Moscow to the provinces on how to run the economy, without taking into account local conditions and, as a result, imbalances arose in the development of some regions. But, even at the present stage, this problem remains unresolved. No object of theoretical research probably occupies such a significant place in science as human labor. The place of work is determined by its significance for the existence and development of the individual and the entire society.

The socio-economic nature of labor reflects the nature of a particular social system. In a socialist society, the socio-economic nature of labor was determined by the following features:

Labor was performed on the basis of socialist ownership of the means of production; those. workers under socialism were both direct producers and owners of the means of production;

Labor acted as directly social, since it served the entire society and was systematically used to implement the main economic law socialism;

Labor represented social activity directly aimed at creating a new society, and in this sense had a creative character;

Labor occupied a significant place in the lives of workers and served the development of the socialist personality.

These features made labor under socialism fundamentally different from labor in capitalist societies.

With the concept of labor content, we capture the specific labor activity of a person and its characteristics. The content of labor characterizes the specifics of purposeful human activity in the process of processing the subject of labor or in general in solving labor problems. It shows the degree of monotony or variety of work, its responsibility, the ratio of mental and physical labor, etc. Therefore, the content of labor partially determines the material working conditions.

The connection between the individual worker and society is carried out in the cooperative labor process on the basis of a joint, socially determined goal. The cooperative form of labor acts in two ways. Firstly, it appears as a technological form of cooperation, conditioned by the technological interaction of workers. The following technological forms of cooperation are found in industry:

The work is done individually, the possibilities of contacts are insignificant, i.e. appear only at certain times (breaks). This type of activity is relatively rare, for example dispatchers or control room attendants.

Work is performed by a group of workers who perform the same or similar operations and are not functionally related to each other. This is usually found in mass production. Here the possibilities of contacts can be greater or lesser.

The work is performed by a group of workers, each of whom, in a chain of interconnected operations, performs one separate operation. Under these conditions, the exchange of experience between group members occurs to the greatest extent. The second form of cooperative labor is the social form of cooperation. It characterizes the quality of interpersonal connections in a work group. This form of cooperation is revealed by the following features:

The level of political consciousness of group members and their general ideological position;

Awareness of the commonality of purpose in the labor process and the degree of understanding of unity

public, collective and personal interests;

The degree of group cohesion, the degree of education and self-education, mutual assistance in the process of work and in personal affairs;

The relationship between the manager and subordinates, leadership style, as well as the preparation and distribution of tasks.

In conclusion, it can be noted that the considered elements of the nature of work are closely related to each other. It must be emphasized that the nature of labor is determined, first of all, by the socio-historical form of labor, which in turn leaves an imprint on the development of the content of labor and the form of its cooperation. And for a long time it was believed that only under socialist conditions does society pay attention to the systematic development of the content of labor, not only with the aim of increasing its productivity, but also with the aim of developing the worker’s personality. Now we need to dwell on the labor motivation of workers under socialism, directly what forced people to work. The first is a social motive, the need for socially significant activities. This motive most clearly reflects the relationship “individual - society”. It lies in the awareness of the need for labor for the existence and further development of society.

The social motive is closely related to the need for knowledge on basic issues National economy and its development. The second is the motive for achievement, the need for self-affirmation. This motive expresses the need to develop one’s mental and physical abilities in the process of work, to apply one’s knowledge and skills. The achievement motive is usually associated with the desire to improve one’s qualifications and professional training.

The third is the motive of contact, the need for cooperation and joint work. It satisfies the need for social contact, cooperation during production activities, and comparison of abilities.

The fourth is the motive of material reward, the need for material support. This motive is based on a “non-labor” need, which is satisfied only when a person works, but the need is not aimed at the work itself. This is the need for material security for the employee and his family.

It should also be noted some other features of the motive of material reward, which lead to the fact that it comes to the fore. This motive does not have a degree of saturation, but at the same time it is easily quantifiable. Salary is the most tangible factor for the worker, which best allows him to judge and evaluate his own situation in the workplace; salary is often perceived as a “status symbol”.

External and internal labor markets

The practice of functioning of successful personnel management systems indicates that it is in a market economy that intra-company labor markets are formed, with their own dynamics of demand and supply of labor already involved in the production process. For real market attitude the entrepreneur's attitude to all factors of production, including labor, encourages him to actively rotate personnel, which inevitably leads to layoffs and the movement of workers from the internal to the external (in relation to the organization) labor market. Important aspect Discussion among scientists and specialists concerns the legality of using the category “internal labor market”. Some authors deny it the right to exist, others widely use it. Thus, A. Rofe notes that in the external labor market there is a distribution of workers according to areas of employment and their movement between enterprises, and in the internal market there is a horizontal and vertical movement from one position to another within the same enterprise. .

And so, we immediately need to define the concepts of the external labor market - a market oriented towards the geographical or professional movement of labor. Within the framework of the external labor market, organizations recruit personnel from outside, choosing workers of the required profession and qualifications who have already been trained outside the organization. And the internal labor market is a labor market based on the movement of personnel within the enterprise:

Or horizontally, when an employee moves to a new workplace, similar to the previous one in the functions performed and the nature of the work;

Or vertically - to a higher rank or position. .

The point of distinguishing labor markets into external and internal is to develop and fine-tune the mechanism of their interaction at all levels, ensuring efficient use human resources. This would make it possible to bring measures government regulation to the level of enterprises and organizations (which will have a beneficial effect on the nature of internal labor markets), reduce the element of spontaneity in their formation and, accordingly, reduce possible losses due to poor knowledge of the capabilities of the enterprise and its employees. So far, the state in matters of managing the social and labor sphere does not reach the grassroots level. Thus, the scope of state regulation of the labor market is significantly narrowed, since the bulk of the economically active population is concentrated on domestic markets labor. The effectiveness of labor market regulation would certainly increase if the state stimulated the initiative on the part of administrations and personnel management services aimed at developing and adjusting its professional qualification characteristics in accordance with innovative changes In the organisation.

The stability of the functioning of the internal labor market is largely determined by the competitiveness of the organization in the external market. And when choosing a place of work, people give preference to the organization in a specific segment of the labor market that most favorably differs from others in the entire set of employment conditions, including opportunities for vocational training, advanced training and career advancement. .

The organization's employees are provided with job guarantees and protection from direct competition in the external labor market. However, in any case, a certain intra-company competition in job advancement, obtaining more profitable jobs, and filling vacancies remains. But the main thing that determines the nature of the functioning of the internal labor market is the multidirectionality of the economic interests of the entrepreneur and the employee. Despite the fact that both parties are equally interested in the normal functioning of the enterprise (after all, this creates the basis for making profits and wages), today the overwhelming majority of employers act, as they say, from a position of strength: they actively take advantage of their position and the shortcomings of the legislation. The owner of an enterprise, delegating the authority to manage factors of production to the administration, is interested in maximizing profits, and this (according to the prevailing opinion among Russian entrepreneurs) is possible only if the administration has a dominant position in relation to hired workers. With the transition to the market, the position of the administration (regardless of the form of ownership) was significantly strengthened and at the same time the position of employees in defending their vital economic interests was weakened. .

Although from the point of view of the formation and functioning of the internal labor market, any organization is a closed structure, the employee remains within its framework as long as he is satisfied with the quality of working life, economic efficiency production and its managers. The demand for labor and its supply within the organization, as well as in the external labor market, is most often unbalanced, but the manifestation of this imbalance is somewhat different. Vacancies constantly arise within the enterprise. A certain part of them is claimed, first of all, by the company's employees, but the employer is not always inclined to solve the problem at the expense of its own sources. Quite often he turns to the external labor market and finds the necessary workers there. Which sources of recruitment he will prefer in each specific case depends on the position of the enterprise and its personnel strategy. The patterns of formation of demand and supply of labor in internal labor markets also have their own specifics in comparison with external labor markets. The volume of intra-organizational labor supply depends, first of all, on the number and composition of the organization’s employees already involved in labor activity; its structure is differentiated according to socio-demographic and professional qualification criteria.