Социально-трудовые права женщин в России
Having unique data we investigate informal employment and “envelope payments” as additional costs of worker displacement in the Russian labor market. In particular we analyze whether displaced workers experience
more involuntary informal employment than their non-displaced counterparts. Our main results confirm
our contention that displacement entraps some of the workers in involuntary informal employment. Those who quit, in turn, experience voluntary informality for the most part, but there seems a minority of quitting workers who end up in involuntary informal jobs. This scenario does not fall on all the workers who separate but predominantly on workers with low human capital. Being able to distinguish between involuntary and voluntary informal employment our study contributes to the debate in the informality literature on the issue of segmented versus integrated labor markets. We also pursue the issue of informality persistence and find that informal employment is indeed persistent as some workers churn from one informal job to the next. Job separations in general and not displacement events per se are associated with larger “envelope payments”.
The book containts articles written by European scholars about the place of socio-economic rights in the modern democracies. The introduction is written by Wiktor Osiatynski, who analyses the confusing concepts of socio-economic rights.
The article contains analysis of the practice of the Russian Constitutional Court on protection of socio-economic rights.
This paper examines wage differentials between permanent/non-permanent and full-time/part-time employees. The analysis is based on the representative Household Survey of Welfare dataset, collected by Rosstat and the World Bank in 2003. The results show that non-permanent workers suffer a loss in wages while part-timers earn more per hour than full-timers, but the wage gap diminishes substantially when controlled for observed and non-observed characteristics. It seems that the theory of segmented labor markets is quite appropriate for explaining these differences in the Russian labor market.
According to the existing literature, informality rates for Russia vary in a wide range from slightly more than 5 to nearly 30 percent. The question arises: what are causes and consequences of so huge variation? Using RMLS data for 2009 the paper investigates the degree of congruence between several alternative definitions of the informal employment in the context of Russian labor market. Analysis shows that depending on empirical definitions informality rates considerably differ – from 11 to 24 percent. With different approaches not only scale of the informal employment but also its socio-demographic profile radically changes. Furthermore, the econometric analysis reveals that the conditional impact of particular factors on the risk of informality varies considerably from one definition to another. This suggests that that estimates of the informal employment for Russia could hardly be regarded as methodologically robust.
This paper is the first to analyze the costs of job loss in Russia, using unique new data from the Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey over the years 2003–2008, including a special supplement on displacement that was initiated by us. We employ fixed effects regression models and propensity score matching techniques in order to establish the causal effect of displacement for displaced individuals. The paper is innovative insofar as we investigate fringe and in-kind benefits and the propensity to have an informal employment relationship as well as a permanent contract as relevant labor market outcomes upon displacement. We also analyze monthly earnings, hourly wages, employment and hours worked, which are traditionally investigated in the literature. Compared to the control group of non-displaced workers (i.e. stayers and quitters), displaced individuals face a significant income loss following displacement, which is mainly due to the reduction in employment and hours worked. This effect is robust to the definition of displacement. The losses seem to be more pronounced and are especially large for older workers with labor market experience and human capital acquired in Soviet times and for workers with primary and secondary education. Workers displaced from state firms experience particularly large relative losses in the short run, while such losses for workers laid off from private firms are more persistent. Turning to the additional non-conventional labor market outcomes, there is a loss in terms of the number of fringe and in-kind benefits for reemployed individuals but not in terms of their value. There is also some evidence of an increased probability of working in informal jobs if displaced. These results point towards the importance of both firm-specific human capital and of obsolete skills obtained under the centrally planned economy as well as to a wider occurrence of job insecurity among displaced workers.