The survey in Moldova4 also demonstrated that the number of labor migrants declined by almost 20 %; however, there was no large-scale return to their native country5. The surveys conducted by CASE-Moldova (Q III 2008 – Q I 2009) and MOM-SBS-AXA (July – August 2008 – March 2009) revealed that, in face of the aggravating problems on Moldova’s labor market, migrants cannot come back home, but at the same time they are prepared to ultimately reduce their spending on their own needs, while as far as possible to maintain the amount of their money transfers to their families in Moldova at their former level.
The size of cross-border money transfers by physical persons in 2009 amounted to 25,mln USD, of which 9,555 mln USD (37,7%) was accounted to by transfers to the CIS countries. The drop in the volume of transfers to the CIS on last year was 31.5 %, while the average amount of one operation was slightly above 500 USD. In 2008 and then again in 2009 the S. Olimova. Kogda rabota stanovitsia neeffektivnoi, oni vozvrashchiautsia domoi. [When work becomes ineffective, they return home.] // Rossiiskaia migratsiia. No 5 - 6 (36 - 37) August – September 2009. P. 35-38.
Russia is the principal ‘recipient’ country for Tajikistan, being a target for 97 % of all Tajik migrants. The total number of emigrants from Tajikistan in 2008 was estimated to be at the level of between 800 thousand and 1 million persons. For Russia, labor migrants from Tajikistan constituted 14 – 16 % of all registered foreign workforce in 2007 – 2008.
S. Olimova. Kogda rabota stanovitsia neeffektivnoi, oni vozvrashchiautsia domoi. [When work becomes ineffective, they return home.] // Rossiiskaia migratsiia. No 5 - 6 (36 - 37) August – September 2009. P. 38.
The report by V. Moshniaga delivered at the regional experts’ meeting ‘Partnership of the CIS countries in the sphere of migration: a search for coordinated decisions’ (Moscow: The Institute for Economic Forecasts of the RAS – the Center for Migration Studies, 24 – 25 September 2009) The number of labor migrants from Moldova, according to the 2004 census and the results of sociological surveys conducted in 2004 – 2008 is estimated to be at the level of 600 thousand, Russia’s share being 58 – %. For Russia, labor migrants from Moldova account for 4.5 – 5.5 % of the foreign workforce registered in Russia per annum.
Section Social Sphere atypical trends observed in Q IV (which is usually the most ‘prosperous’ quarter) serve as markers of the crisis and its ‘retranslation’ onto the CIS countries, where both human and money flows are closely linked to Russia (Fig. 5)1.
The 31 % drop in the volume of transfers in 2009 by comparison with the previous year can be viewed as an indirect source of information concerning the number of labor migrants in Russia: considering the general decline in the size of real wages across Russia by 7.4 %2, one can speak of a drop in the number of labor migrants in Russia by 20 %, but no means by 30 % as it follows from the official statistics published by the FMS: the number of work permits was 1,473.4 thousand, including those issued to foreign citizens arriving under the visa-waiver regime – 1,181.3 thousand (80 % of the total number of work permits).
Source: data published by the RF Central Bank.
Fig. 5. Money transfers from Russia to the CIS countries, based on the statistical data on cross-border operations carried on by physical persons, Q I 2006 – Q II The strengthening of the informal labor market is aptly illustrated by data on Moscow - the only subject of the Federation that was examined in the course of both ‘waves’ of surveys car However, the drop in the volume of money transfers could be partly caused by the fact that more people are now preferring to bring home cash instead of sending it via bank transfers.
March 2009 to October 2008, with a seasonal adjustment. Kapeliushnikov R. I. Konets rossiiskoi modeli rynka truda [An end of the Russian model of the labor market] M., 2009. P. 44.
RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks ried out by the Center for Migration Studies. In less than one year, the share of legally employed migrants (properly registered with the migration authorities and working under written labor contracts) has dropped in Moscow from 37 to 25 % (Fig. 6), while the percentage of migrants with work permits has decreased by more than 1.8 times. As a result, only one quarter of Moscow migrants have full legal status, which roughly corresponds to the state of affairs that had existed before the 2006 reform of migration legislation which was intended to increase the lawfulness of foreign citizens’ stay in Russia.
Source: Obsledovanie TsMI [The Study for Migration Studies’ Survey], 2008, 2009.
Fig. 6. Levels of legal employment in Moscow, 2008 (N = 150), 2009 (N = 300), as % It must be acknowledged that the presence of migrants in the labor market, including in time of crisis, is profitable not only for the migrants alone. Therefore the restrictive measures being introduced with regard to the labor migration of CIS citizens are creating an illusion of a significant drop in the number of labor migrants. In reality, however – given the general vagueness of socio-economic targets – the disconnection and the poorly definable configuration of labor markets, as well as the widespread informal practices, the toughening of migratory regulation which stifles the desire to improve existing legislation has already resulted in the spread of illegal migration and shadowy practices and will undoubtedly conduce to their further proliferation.
According to Rosstat data that are based on migrant registration at the place of residence, the level of internal labor mobility in Russia remains low. As no aggregate information on temSection Social Sphere porary migration and de-facto long-term migration without registration at the place of residence or with a stay for a period in excess of one year is published in Russia, the dynamics of such migration cannot be assessed properly. In the crisis year 2009, several differently vectored trends could be at work in Russia, simultaneously reducing and increasing spatial mobility therein.
A drop in mobility could result in a reduction of labor supply in big cities, especially in such sectors as construction and retail trade where traditionally a lot of migrant workers are employed. With the advent of crisis, this situation contributed to ‘export’ of unemployment when people who had lost their jobs usually returned to their native places thus aggravating the situation in the local labor markets. At the same time, the tense situation in the labor markets of small towns, including mono-industry towns, represents a serious factor that induces people to seek employment in other towns and regions of the country.
In order to cope with this situation, the RF Government has taken a number of measures aimed at bringing down tensions in the labor market of subjects of the Russian Federation.
These measures involve the provision of targeted assistance to citizens – for example, by organizing their resettlement in another locality for the purpose of filling the existing job vacancies, including those created within the framework of federal target programs and investment projects. Initially the government planned to assist the resettlement of 100 thousand persons1;
however, at the final stages of signing resettlement agreements with the regions, this figure was reduced to 15.9 thousand persons. Resettlement assistance was actually rendered to 11 thousand persons; the corresponding allocations accounted for 70 % of the funds earmarked for resettlement purposes2. The failure of that government initiative was predicted by experts from the very beginning: an analysis of the vacancies (approximately 900 thousand vacancies in all Russian regions) that is posted to the much-advertised Work in Russia portal has indicated that these vacancies (as well as all the other options offered by the Federal Employment Service) have a rather low attractiveness in the eyes of employment seekers even in time of crisis. As of mid-February 2009, 6.5 % of the posted vacancies offered the minimum wage of 4,330 Rb, and another 9 % of them – wages ranging from the minimum wage to 5 thousand Rb3. Only % of the vacancies offered wages in excess of 20 thousand Rb (most of these vacancies were situated in Moscow Capital Region and the northern regions of Russia which differ significantly from the rest of the country in terms of purchasing power parity), and only 5.3 % of the vacancies offered the provision of a dwelling (usually it was employer-provided lodging or a room at a hostel))4. This situation has not changed since then: as of the beginning of 2010, only 5 % of the vacancies posted to the Federal Employment Service Portal implied the provision of a specified dwelling, and 8.1 % of the vacancies offered subsistence wages.
Doekhat’ do raboty. [To travel to work] // SmartMoney. 18 May 2009.
Monitoring realizatsii regional’nykh programm, predusmatrivaiushchikh dopolnitel’nye meropriiatiia, napravlennye na snizhenie napriazhennosti na rynke truda (ianvar’ – dekabr’ 2009) [Monitoring of the implementation of the regional programs envisaging additional measures designed to reduce tensions on the labor market (January - December 2009)]. Ì.: Rostrud [RF Federal Labor and Employment Service], 2010. P. 11.
Under the sub-program, the State undertook to cover the transportation costs connected with resettlement and the cost of renting a dwelling (550 Rb per day, for three months on average) and to pay per diems for the time of travel.
At the same time, the increased maximum unemployment benefit amounts to 4.9 thousand Rb.
Mkrtchian N. V. Gotovy li bezrabotnye ekhat’ za rabotoi [Are jobless people ready to seek work elsewhere // Rossiiskaia migratsiia [Russian migration]. 2009. No 1.
RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks The resettlement of ‘mono-towns’ (one-industry towns) is an even more questionable measure. The resettlement model plan is based on a very untypical town – Togliatti. The program of resettling the inhabitants of mono-towns in other regions of the country has been developed by the Agency for Mortgage Loan Restructuring (ARIZhK). In particular, the program envisages that part of the newly laid-off workers from Togliatti should be resettled in Tikhvin, Leningrad Oblast, where a railcar building plant has recently been launched1. The results of this program’s implementation are yet to be seen, but it is unlikely that it will become popular – for at least one reason: these people are asked to move from a big city to a small town.
Thus, even if the migratory processes did respond to the crisis phenomena in the economy, the existing statistical instruments have made it impossible to adequately assess the changes.
The measures taken by the authorities with regard to the migration sphere were predictably populist. Perhaps, the only result of those measures was a change in the ratio between the legal and latent components of temporary labor migration into Russia.
4.3. Socio-cultural Sphere 4. 3. 1. Development of t he Educat ional Syst em in Characteristics of the State of Affairs in the Field of Education The global economic crisis which broke out in autumn 2008 has brought the educational system before the new challenges: on the one hand, the need to ensure advance of reforms in this field, and on the other, direct it to the training of new specialists needed for the post-crisis development. At the same time, different levels of educational system face new tasks in the new circumstances. Simultaneously, we should bear in mind the demographic factor, which affects all educational subsystems to the highest extent.
Preschool Upbringing and Education Statistics on the situation in preschool education system provide information on its development solely prior to 2007 inclusive.
Prolonged decline in the number of children attending preschool educational facilities has stopped. At present, we observe an upward trend which marks a growing number of children attending preschool education facilities. (Table 1).
According to the Rosstat data, at the onset of 20082 2,232 thousand children required places in preschool education facilities.
As registered from 2005 a growing number of pupils in preschool education system were caused by two reasons.
Sokrashchennykh rabotnikov ‘AvtoVAZa pereseliat iz Tol’iatti v Leningradskuiu oblast’ [The dismissed workers of AvtoVAZ will be resettled from Togliatti to Leningrad Oblast] / / NEWSru.com, 28 January 2010.
Latest available data.
Section Social Sphere Table Preschool Education Facilities (by year end) 1993 1995 2000 2003 2004 2005 2006 Number of preschool education facilities, thousands 78.3 68.6 51.3 47.8 47.2 46.5 46.2 45.Number of children at preschool education facilities, thou6763 5584 4263 4321 4423 4530 4713 sands Number of preschool education facilities, which have ameni– – – 3241 3912 4172 4423 ties for short-run stay of children Of which:
Number of groups of short-run stay of children – – – 4879 6150 7008 7852 Number of children in groups of short-run stay, thousands – – – 48.3 60.9 70.7 80.9 92.Number of children per 100 places in preschool education 90 83 81 88 92 95 99 facilities, persons.
Coverage of children by preschool education facilities, % of 57.4 54.3 55.0 57.6 57.7 57.3 58.3 59.the number of children aged one to six Source: the Rosstat, Russia in numbers.
First, the number of birth has marked an upward trend since the beginning of 2000s (Table 2).
Table Number of Births (minus still-born), Russian Federation, thousand.
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 1311.6 1397.0 1477.3 1502.5 1457.4 1479.7 1610.1 1714.Second, the number of preschool age children attending preschool facilities has been growing: from 55% in 2000 to 59.2% in 2007. This upward trend to a great extent was due to an economic boom, when labor demand went up and mothers were anxious to send their children to kindergartens in order to turn up to work. However, economic crisis may change the trend, because for low-income households access to preschool education facilities, first of all, depends on the charge rate and availability of benefits.