Issuu on Google+

Analysis of the Labor Market Situation in the Russian Federation for Purposes of Efficient Employment of Migrant Workers from the Kyrgyz Republic and the Republic of Tajikistan

Photo: "Rhythm of Eurasia"

Prepared by Poletaev Dmitriy Vyacheslavovich, PhD in Economics

This study was prepared with support by the Tian Shan Policy Center, American University of Central Asia

Moscow November 2016


2

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction p. 3 Tools and methodologies of the study p. 6 1. A socioeconomic profile of migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan p. 8 2. Migration to Russia by migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan p. 12 3. Education and retraining of migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan p. 18 4. Work in Russia by migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan p. 37 5. Health of migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan p. 73 6. Integration of migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan Conclusions p. 89 Bibliography p. 93 Annex 1. Questionnaire tables p. 98 Annex 2. Questionnaire for migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan in Russia p. 139 Annex 3. Questionnaire for in-depth interviews with migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan in Russia p. 149 Annex 4. Questionnaire for expert interviews p. 151 Annex 5. List of experts p. 152


3

Introduction This study consists of three parts that mutually complement one another and have been prepared by three authors. The first part was drafted by Nasritdinov E.Z., an AUCA Adjunct Professor (Kyrgyzstan) and is dedicated to the pre-departure and vocational training of migrant workers in the Kyrgyz Republic. It is based on 8 expert interviews (of which 4 interviews were held with representatives of private employment agencies) and a desk study by the author and sheds light on the private employment agencies’ experience in dealing with Kyrgyz migrants, analyzes employment opportunities and potential as part of the pre-departure training of Kyrgyz migrant workers. The author in question provides recommendations on utilizing the potential in a pre-departure training if migrant workers available in Kyrgyzstan, including prospects for the differentiation of flows of labor migration from Kyrgyzstan as well as prospects for the management of flows by the Kyrgyz Republic. The second part covers a pre-departure training of migrant workers in the Republic of Tajikistan and was prepared by Olimova S.K., a Ph.D. in Philology (Tajikistan). The drafting of that part was a result of an expert survey (8 experts) and a desk study. It analyzes in a great detail opportunities and capacity available within the Tajik education system needed for the vocational training of Tajik migrant workers and provides recommendations on improving the pre-departure training and preparation of such migrants as well as methodologies for such training of Tajik migrant workers. The third part is dedicated to the analysis of the labor market situation in the Russian Federation for purposes of an efficient employment of migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan and was prepared by Poletaev D.V., Ph.D. in Economics (Russia), and is the biggest of the three and is based on findings of surveys (1001 individuals surveyed in Moscow, Saint Petersburg and Yekaterinburg), expert interviews (15 experts interviewed in Moscow, Saint Petersburg and Yekaterinburg) and in-depth interviews (31 migrants surveyed in Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Yekaterinburg and Kazan). The findings were used to analyze the current practice in a pre-departure training of migrant workers in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan and to assess the state of the labor market in Russia and its need for migrants. This study analyzes market niches occupied by migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan as well as the professional skillset and training they possess, and evaluates the practices that emerged in the Russian labor market with respect to migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan including their prospects for change. In addition, this study prepared and analyzed profiles of Kyrgyz and Tajik migrant workers and prepared recommendations on the future use of skills and competencies available to migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. The Russian economy does need inflows of migrant workers. This is evidenced by discouraging projections by the Rosstat (the Russian Statistics Agency), pursuant to which, the working-age population has been continuously decreasing (Diagram 1). Between 2009 and 2025, the Rosstat projects that the working-age population will have decreased by 14 million individuals.


4 Diagram 1. A decrease in working-age population in Russia pursuant to the Rosstat projections between 2009 and 2025. 100

-100

-218-213

-300 -308 -500 -497 -597 -650 -698

-700

-900

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2011

2010

2009

-1300

2013

-1083 -1120 -1141 - 1143 -1175 -1235

2012

-1100

-879 -961 -1013 -1013

Source: Rosstat A need for inflows of migrant workers was specified in the Russian Migration Policy Concept: ―Migration processes play a major role in the socioeconomic and demographic development of the Russian Federation… The permanent settlement of migrant workers in the Russian Federation is becoming one of the sources of an increase in the country’s population as a whole and its regions in particular, while the attraction of foreign workers in priority professional and qualification groups in accordance with needs of the Russian economy is a must for the country’s further consistent development‖1. A 2016 World Bank report states the following: ―The process of diversification is taking place slowly which is brought about by… a limited supply of labor force, including structural and institutional restrictions, that have to be eliminated in the first place‖2. Therefore, at least in the short-term and medium-term perspectives, migration to Russia will be an important factor of its economic and social development. This study provides an analysis of the labor market situation in the Russian Federation for purposes of efficient employment of migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Project goals Analyzing the Russian labor market and the practices in it concerning migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Analyzing the supply of, and demand for, certain professions and qualifications among migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan to prepare suggestions on modernizing the migration policy in the host country (Russia) and in source countries (Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan). Project objectives 1. Analyzing the existing practice in the pre-departure training of migrant workers from source countries – Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. 1

Concept of State Migration Policy of the Russian Federation till 2025 http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/15635 2 The Russian Economy: a Gradual and Slow Forward Movement, #36, 9 November 2016 http://www.vsemirnyjbank.org/ru/country/russia/publication/rer


5 2. Assessing the labor market situation in Russia and its short-term, medium-term and long-term needs for migrant workers. 3. Analyzing labor market niches occupied by migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan and the level of use of the professional skills and training thy possess. 4. Assessing the practice in the Russian labor market that emerged with respect to migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan as well as prospects for changes in it. 5. Preparing and analyzing profiles of Kyrgyz and Tajik migrant workers employed in Russia. 6. Drafting recommendations on future use of skills and competencies possessed by Kyrgyz and Tajik migrant workers in both Russia and in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, respectively, and the possible promotion of an effective migration policy in all the three countries in question.


6 Tools and methodologies of the study This study collected the existing secondary information and documents associated with the study topic and related issues and analyzed materials of studies conducted earlier, as well as the available statistics, legislation and law enforcement practices and coverage of labor migration to Russia from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan in public and political discussions and media. Findings of this analysis were used in the development of tools and the concept of this study. Time and geographic frameworks This study was conducted in Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Yekaterinburg, and Kazan from 1 February till 30 November 2016. The study employed several methods and various techniques to capture primary data in 4 cities of the Russian Federation (Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Yekaterinburg and Kazan). The use of quantitative methods (surveys) enabled the researcher to identify the profile of migrant workers and track the dynamic of changes over the past years (using findings captured by the Center for Migration Studies of Projects). The use of qualitative methods (expert and in-depth interviews) enabled the author to more deeply understand the specificities of the adaptation by various groups of migrant workers dependent on their social, economic, educational statuses as well as sectors of employment, migration strategies, etc. 1. Surveying migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan in Russia The overall sample in Russia totaled 1001 respondents. This number included 501 respondents in Moscow, 250 – in Saint Petersburg, and 250 – in Yekaterinburg. The sample was formed under the following parameters: age (34% - aged 18 to 25; 33% - aged 26 to 35; 33% - aged 36 to 60); sex (70% - males, 30% - females); source country (50% - from Kyrgyzstan, 50% - from Tajikistan); work experience in Russia (50% - possessing a work experience of 1-2 years, 50% - 3 years and more) and primary areas of employment (maximum diversity). Surveys were conducted in various districts on selected cities of Russia – central and peripheral. Surveyed migrants from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan were aged 15 to 60. No more than 2 individuals were surveyed at any given location of survey. Questionnaires consisted of several sections of questions: socio-demographic section, migration to Russia, education and retraining, work in Russia, health, migration to Russia and integration. 2. Semi-structured interviews with experts (a total of 15 interviews: 8 – in Moscow, 3 – in Saint Petersburg, 4 – in Yekaterinburg). The main goal of expert interviews was to analyze the understanding of the topic studied by groups of specialists and stakeholders. Experts interviewed included officers of various agencies and organizations, officers of human rights activist NGOs and diaspora institutions, migrations scholars and researchers, etc. (see Annex 5). In order to conduct interviews, this study utilized a guide allowing the interviewer to guide the interview. Interviews were voice-recorded, transcribed and processed as text documents. When interviewing experts, the interviewer utilized a combination of techniques including:  A short questionnaire including open-ended questions (for qualitative analysis);  A voice-recorded free narrative to capture information that didn’t make the questionnaire. This was done to formalize the overall aspects of the expert interviews on the one hand, and to minimize losses of unique information possessed by experts on the other hand. Findings of expert interviews were utilized in the drafting of this report.


7 3. In-depth interviews with migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan in Russia (a total of - 21 interviews: 4 – in Moscow, 5 – in Saint Petersburg, 5 – in Yekaterinburg, and 7 – in Kazan). 50% of interviews were held with migrant workers from Tajikistan and the other 50% - with those from Kyrgyzstan. The migrants questioned were of differing ages, engaged in differing areas of employment, were of differing family statuses and possessed differing migration intents.


8 1. A socioeconomic profile of migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan The study yet again illustrated the trend that emerged recently typical for migrants from Central Asia to Russia: Russia is mostly a destination for residents of small towns (population of less than 100 000 people), townships, district centers and rural areas (Tables 8, 8.2, Diagrams 4, 4.2.). This is overall reflective of the recent trends of migration flows from Central Asia to Russia. Migration changed over the past ten years and migration flows have increasingly included migrants possessing rural culture. This partially brings about the conflict potential in the places of their stay in Russia (large cities and large metropolitan areas), when the Russian urban culture and Central Asian rural culture clash. Here, differences by source country among respondents are insignificant: about 40% of Kyrgyz migrants and 42% of Tajik migrants travel to Russia from small towns and district centers; 22% of Kyrgyz migrants and 23% of Tajik migrants are from rural areas. Capitals of these two countries send 14% of Kyrgyz migrants and 12% of Tajik migrants. Large cities, respectively, send 24% of Kyrgyz migrants and 23% of Tajik migrants. Differences between men and women in the overall sample cannot be called significant, although they are still present. In a breakdown by country, we can see that among Kyrgyz and Tajik men, compared to women, more people tend to arrive from rural areas (Diagram 4, Table 4.2). Among Kyrgyz female migrants one can observe more migrants from the Kyrgyz capital and large cities compared to Tajik female migrants. Migrants to Russia mostly include those possessing secondary-vocational education (31%) or general secondary education (37%) - (Diagram 5, Table 9). Tajik female migrants on average possess a lower level of education compared to their Kyrgyz counterparts; Kyrgyz male migrants tend to possess a lower level of education compared to their Tajik counterparts (Tables 9, 9.2, Diagrams 5, 5.2). Overall, migrants surveyed are officially married (58%) (Diagram 6., Таблица 10) or unofficially married without registration (5%). Unmarried migrants total 30%; divorced – about 6%; widowed – about 2%. Here, about a third (32%) of female migrants from Kyrgyzstan were never married, while this figure is twice as less in the case of their Tajik counterparts (16%) - (Table 10.2, Diagram 6). Differences between male migrants from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan are not as drastic, but here one needs to note that among Tajik male migrants a third (35%) were never married while this figure only totals 28% in the case of their Kyrgyz counterparts. Kyrgyz migrants with families and those who arrived in Russia with a spouse/partner outnumber their Tajik counterparts 1.5 to 1: 67% against 45% (Table 11, Diagrams 7, 7.2). The study yet again proved that there are very few decidedly poor people among migrants. The sample shows that there are only about 5% of those who claim their revenues are not sufficient to cover their basic needs (Tables 12, 12.2, Diagram 8, 8.2). at the same time, migrants cannot be called well-off either: 54% of them only have enough money for basic needs (food, clothing, etc.). Only 28% buy the most needed things; yet, they cannot make savings. About 13% can afford to buy most basic things and make savings. Overall, one can note that migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan are somewhat better-off than those from Tajikistan.


9 Diagram 2. Distribution of respondents by nationality Diagram 3. Distribution of respondents by (%) ethnicity (%)

Diagram 4. Distribution of respondents by type of Diagram 4.2. Distribution of respondents by residential area in the place of permanent residence type of residential area in the place of (%) permanent residence (%)


10 Diagram 5. Distribution of respondents by education Diagram 6. Distribution of respondents by (%) marital status (%)

Diagram 7. Distribution of respondents by place of Diagram 7.2. Distribution of respondents by stay of husband/wife/partner (%) sex and place of stay of husband/wife/partner (%)

Diagram 8. Distribution of respondents by financial Diagram 8.2. Distribution of respondents by situation of their families today (%) sex and financial situation of their families today (%)


11 2. Migration to Russia by migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan About two thirds of the surveyed migrants possessed work experience at homeland - 60% (Table 13, Diagram 9). Tajik migrants tended to have slightly more people who had work experience at home (42%), compared to their Kyrgyz counterparts (39%). In terms of sex distribution, there are more differences in the case of women: 48% of Tajik women had no work experience back at homeland, while in the case of Kyrgyz women this parameter was 42% (Table 13.2, Diagram 9.2). The average length of work back at homeland was higher among the Kyrgyz migrants compared to their Tajik counterparts: 9,24 years compared to 9,01 years. Gender differences are more pronounced in the case of men: throughout the sample, the average time of work back at homeland was 9,8 years for men, and 7,32 for women. Overall, as the sample indicates, the average time of employment back at homeland is between 9 and 13 years (Table 14, Diagram 10). The main areas of employment among respondents from source countries include: trade (as in retailing) – 20%; construction – 16%; transportation and communications - 14%; public catering (restaurants, entertainment, hotels, etc.) - 14%; education – 12%. About 8% of respondents back at homeland were employed in industry, 5% - in healthcare, 1% - in the residential and utilities stock. Differences in areas of employment back at homeland were not as significant among Kyrgyz and Tajik migrants. The largest difference is observed in the employment in construction: 18% among Tajik migrants, and 13% among Kyrgyz migrants (Table 15, Diagram 11). Gender-based differences in areas of employment are significant between men and women from both source countries. Here, among Tajik women back at homeland no one was employed in construction, while among men this ratio is 24%. Only a quarter of women and only 9% of men worked in the education sector; in services - 21% of women and 11% of men; in healthcare - 15% of women and 0,5% of men; in trade (retailing) - 27% of women and 18% of men (Table 15, Diagram 11.2). Identical differences can be observed between men and women from Kyrgyzstan. Among men, 19% were employed in construction, and among women - 0%. Such a difference can also be observed in transportation and communications: in this sector, 23% of men and 0% of women were employed. In the education sector, 21% of women and 6% of men were employed; in the healthcare sector, 13% of women and 3% of men were employed (Table 15.2, Diagram 11.3). We decided to find out what qualification obtained back at homeland, according to migrants, would help them secure the best employment in Russia. 21% of respondents failed to answer this question, 17% believed that there was no point in getting a qualification back at homeland as Russia only provided low-wage jobs for migrant workers anyway that did not require and qualification or skills. Another 3% believed that studying back at homeland did not provide them with qualification or skills that would be useful in Russia. This is caused, in their opinions, by low quality of education. The best occupations for a successful employment in Russia are in the construction sector: this is according to 17% of respondents. Just as popular occupations include those in the transportation and communications sector (8%); those in the services sector (8%); 5% - in the healthcare sector and 3% - in the education sector. The least popular occupations are in the industry – 1,6% and the residential and utilities stock– 1,5% (Table 16, Diagram 12). Interestingly, opinions concerning qualifications that are most auspicious for employment in Russia correspond to actual sectors of employment of migrants back at homeland although one can observe certain difference. Here, according to Tajik migrants, the most popular qualifications for the best employment in Russia are in the construction (as stated by 25% of respondents). Qualifications in trade (retailing) are considered to possess the biggest upside by 17% of Tajik migrants; in services - 7%; in transportation and communications - 8%. With respect to the question of the benefit of obtaining qualification back at homeland for purposes of working in Russia, opinions were rather skeptical: 19% of respondents stated that no qualification has any potential; while Tajik respondents were less skeptical - 15%. Kyrgyz migrants believed that obtaining a qualification back at homeland provides opportunities for employment in Russia as follows: in construction - 9%; in trade – 10%; in services – 9%; in transportation and communications – 8%. Kyrgyz female migrant workers are more skeptical about obtaining qualification back at homeland (Table 16.2, Diagrams 12.2, 12.3): every fifth woman believes it makes no sense to obtain


12 any qualification back at homeland because it will be of no use in Russia. About a third of Kyrgyz female respondents failed to answer the question of whether it makes sense to obtain qualification back at homeland and what qualification would help secure the best employment in Russia. The most optimistic individuals with respect to this question are Tajik males: only 14% of them found it unnecessary to obtain a qualification back at homeland. Preferences of respondents in a breakdown by sex differed significantly. According to Tajik and Kyrgyz female migrants, the following qualifications are best to secure the best employment in Russia: trade (25% and 14% respectively); services (13% and 11%) and healthcare (10% and 9%). It is worth noting that 6% of female Tajik migrants and 7% of female Kyrgyz migrants believe that there is upside to obtaining a qualification in the education sector back at homeland to secure the best employment in Russia, while males from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan do not view the education sector as having the best upside for employment in Russia (only 2% of male migrants of both nationalities replied positively to this question). Notably, Kyrgyz female migrant workers are more skeptical. This is probably explained by the fact that while they had major work experience in sectors not associated with hard unskilled labor, they understand that the labor market situation, partially brought about by the difference in education standards between Russia and their homeland, leaves them with very little chance of securing jobs occupied by Russian citizens. With regard to the question of prospects for obtaining a construction qualification back at homeland, Kyrgyz male migrants are more skeptical compared to their Tajik counterparts (Table 16.2, Diagrams 12.2, 12.3): only 14% of them find it useful for employment in Russia to have such a construction qualification, Tajik migrants - 33%. However, 12% of Kyrgyz male migrants believe a qualification in transportation and communications (Tajiks - 10%) is useful and in services (8% of Kyrgyz respondents and only 5% of Tajik respondents). Tajik migrants also believe that trade has more upside in terms of qualification. 14% of Tajik respondents thought so, while only 8% of Kyrgyz migrants agreed. Differences of opinion between Tajik and Kyrgyz respondents with regard to the question of benefit of qualifications obtained back at homeland for purposes of employment in Russia are associated with the fact that Kyrgyz migrants significantly expanded their areas of employment in Russia, while Tajik migrants are still most concentrated in hard unskilled labor.


13 Diagram 9. Distribution of respondents by work Diagram 9.2. Distribution of respondents by experience back at homeland (in Tajikistan and work experience back at homeland (in Kyrgyzstan) (%) Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan) (%)

Diagram 10. Distribution of respondents, on average, Diagram 11. Distribution of respondents by by area of employment back at homeland (years) area of employment back at homeland (%)

Diagram 11.2. Distribution of respondents by area of Diagram 11.3. Distribution of respondents employment back at homeland, Tajik migrants (%) by area of employment back at homeland, Kyrgyz migrants (%)


14

Diagram 12. Distribution of respondents by the issue of securing a qualification needed for the best employment in Russia (%)


15 Diagram 12.2. Distribution of respondents by the issue of securing a qualification needed for the best employment in Russia, Tajik migrants (%)

Diagram 12.3. Distribution of respondents by the issue of securing a qualification needed for the best employment in Russia, Kyrgyz migrants (%)


16 3. Education and retraining of migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan The skills and qualification needed to secure employment in Russia are usually gained by migrants on the job. Education acquired back at homeland is difficult to apply amidst the realities of life and work in Russia. The experience in the Russian labor market prompts migrants to rely on newly gained skills and qualification in Russia rather than the training received back at homeland. Indeed, all qualification is “left behind.� Here, the work experience has to be started from scratch. Migrants say that they are unlikely to be hired because there is no trust of them and they will only be employed where physical labor is needed. This is due to the burden they are destined to carry, it is attributed to them and fixed in the local mindset and perception. And, naturally, it corresponds to the labor market niches available. One has to work this through with young people. People build their short-term life projects that tend to last for years and decades [the life projects – D.P.]. There is no upside for their future. You will have to be gaining a qualification for so long, and so much time will pass until you actually make sure that it is adequate to make good money... That too is an investment in itself and there is no certainty as to whether migrants wish to invest so much of their life into gaining a qualification. From expert interviews. Experts mentioned that labor migrants find it difficult to tie their previous qualification and skills with labor migration in Russia and subsequent life back at homeland. Their long-term plans do not include these two worlds. Of those who returned home almost nobody uses the qualification gained in Russia with the exception of drivers and renovations contractors. Nobody uses Russian-trained skills back home. Unfortunately, there is a gap between the two worlds. From expert interviews. In this context, professional orientation and information services, especially for young people, that can help current and prospective labor migrants realize that they can build their own future, come to the foreground. Given the fact that migration to Russia mostly originates from rural areas of source countries where people find it difficult to navigate themselves in prospects and realities of an urban life that they had not encountered previously, such an assistance is difficult to underestimate. The information services aimed at helping people gain needful qualification always contains several life scenarios: stay (as in settle) in Russia, eventually return home, and move to a third country. If migrants start to understand that under various scenarios they will benefit from efforts, time, etc. invested in gaining a required qualification that they can later convert into better lives, then it will make sense. Raising awareness helps but it is not a universal solution as migrants always need their money quick. From expert interviews. Important factors include the recognition of diplomas and certificates acquired in the course country that attest to skills and qualification. As part of EEU, such experience is being developed as conditions for the mutual recognition of diplomas of EEU countries are entering into effect. However, with respect to CIS countries, including Central Asian countries that are donors of labor force for Russia, this is not the case: this system is still weak and is waiting proper implementation. Here is a young guy. He graduated from high school and, ideally, he still needs to study. Yet, he goes to Russia to get education. A universal diploma that would be useful everywhere would definitely appeal to young people. From expert interviews


17 Overall, the preparation for a departure for Russia is mostly limited to the inclusion of migrant workers into social networks of their country fellows and is poorly related to education or retraining, or improvement of training for working in Russia (Tables 17, 17.2, Diagrams 16, 16.2). Here, about 90% of respondents learned contacts of relatives or acquaintances in a Russian town where they decided to travel to work. However, only 3% of them passed courses to train and prepare for life in Russia, and only every fifth of them learned Russian at special courses. Here, about a half of respondents learned Russian on his/her own. Tajik migrants were stronger engaged in such a selfstudy compared to their Kyrgyz counterparts (54% v. 46%). Four out of five migrants checked their health, took medical tests and visited a physician. Three out of every four respondents learned about the rules of registration at the place of residence, rules for securing work permits and rules for filing for employment in Russia. Interestingly, two thirds of respondents learned about employment opportunities in Russia from their acquaintances, however, a realistic and actual job was only found in Russia by every third respondent. 67% of respondents took their education papers with themselves; 57% of respondents found a place to live in advance; and 42% of respondents checked whether they had been blacklisted for entry into Russia in advance. A skeptical attitude on part of Kyrgyz migrants toward using their education in the course of searching for a job in Russia is proved by the fact that only 62% of them took their education papers with them, while 71% of their Tajik counterparts did so. 38% of Tajik migrants found a job in Russia in advance, while only 29% of Kyrgyz migrants did the same. It looks like, on the one hand it is associated with Tajik migrants’ more effectively utilizing migrants’ social networks as well as a better cohesiveness of such networks, and on the other hand, this is due to the fact that Kyrgyz migrants tend to try themselves in other occupations in Russia compared to what their social networks can offer them, and therefore they are more independent in seeking for a job in Russia (compared to their Tajik counterparts). Interestingly, there are less Kyrgyz women who travel to Russia already having secured a job compared to Kyrgyz men (24% v. 31%). Command of Russian among Kyrgyz migrant workers is stronger compared to their Tajik counterparts, and yet only about 10-12% of all respondents believe their Russian is not adequate to successfully fill out paperwork. About a quarter of Tajik migrants feel they lack skills needed to fill out required papers. 64% of respondents believe they Russian is adequate to successfully fill out the required paperwork (Table 18.2, Diagram 17.2). According to the majority of respondents, their Russian is adequate to function in public places and settings (in a store, in a pharmacy, in the mail office, etc.) (Tables 18.1, 18.3, Diagrams 17.1, 17.3). The study revealed that respondents mostly get education back home and only every hundredth of them studies at qualification enhancement courses in Russia (Tables 20, 21, Diagrams 19, 19.2, 19.3, 20, 20.2, 20.3). Migrants don’t have many options when it comes to improving their professional qualification in Russia due to the limited resources at their disposal (money, time, etc.). I want to study… studying is always good. But in order to enter a local vocational school or an institute or courses I will need money. In the meantime, the system in which we work that provides for us getting underpaid, and when we have to pay for registration and apartment, while we earn very little, we simply cannot afford to attend qualification enhancement courses. We want to study but we cannot. It would be great if technical and vocational courses were free of charge. For instance, a crane operator courses that we don’t have in Tajikistan. The same applies to language courses. Today, English is a priority. If you speak English, the world is at your feet. You can travel to Europe or US and work there. I am sure that the job I am doing here rates a salary two- or even threefold higher compared to what I am paid here. Another thing is that I can come to Russia freely where as in order to go overseas I will first need to secure a visa, get a permit. 28 years old, Tajik man (of Pamiri ethnicity), Moscow The primary opportunity for the enhancement of qualification for migrants is the on-the-job training. About a third (31%) of migrant workers stated that they improved their qualification in Russia by learning on the job.


18 I was taught as I worked. I never attended any specialized courses although I intended to when I came here the first time. See, training costs money and I my priorities were to earn rather than pay for studying. Most of the time, skills are gained with daily practice, with experience. Once can say, with time. Every day you learn something new. 28 years old, Kyrgyz man, Moscow 57% of respondents claimed that on-the-job training is not necessary. Evidently, this is explained by their lack of any serious skills or competencies at the jobs they are holding. Almost every fifth migrant worker wished to improve his/her qualification in Russian vocational schools or at professional courses but feels that is impossible. Only 0,8% of respondents study and only 2,5% intend to do so. A more realistic option, according to migrants, is qualification enhancement at professional courses: 14% of respondents claimed they could and wanted to go for them; 2,4% already study and 17% believe it is impossible although desirable. Of those who wish to use opportunities to improve qualification at professional trainings, Tajik migrants are a majority (Table 21, Diagrams 20, 20.2, 20.3). More than a half of respondents find it advisable to secure a better education in Russia but we can see that such a wish is primarily hypothetical. Experts questioned told us about majors and qualifications that Central Asian labor migrants are willing to pursue. Overall, options here depend on the price of education and prospects for further employment: at least for their children, migrants wish them office jobs, jobs that have a potential of career growth and a gradual increase in income. There is very little demand for practitioner degrees. Migrants want their education to be contract-based and not too expensive. Parents are willing to go for hard jobs, but they wish for their children to study and work in the office, to avoid physical labor. From expert interviews. Diagram 13. Number of foreigners in Russian secondary and vocational education institutions in 1995-2015 (individuals, x1000)

Source: Arefyev, A.L., Sheregi F.E. Exports of Russian Education Services: A Statistical Compilation. Issue 6 / Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. — M.: Sociocenter, 2016.


19 Diagram 14. Number of foreigners in Russian/Soviet Russian higher education institutions in 1950-2015 (individuals, x1000)

Source: Arefyev, A.L., Sheregi F.E. Exports of Russian Education Services: A Statistical Compilation. Issue 6 / Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. — M.: Sociocenter, 2016.

Diagram 15. Share of foreigners in the total number of students in Russian/Soviet Russian higher and secondary and vocational education institutions in 1950-2015 (individuals, x1000)

Source: Arefyev, A.L., Sheregi F.E. Exports of Russian Education Services: A Statistical Compilation. Issue 6 / Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. — M.: Sociocenter, 2016. The very estimate of the number of foreigners in SVE schools makes it possible to see that there is capacity for increasing that number. In 2014/2015, Russian (secondary vocational education) SVE schools employed (Diagram 13) 2103 thousand full-time and part-time students, including 24,9 thousand foreigners, which accounts for 1,18% of the total student body. Russian HEI (higher education institution) schools in 2014/2015 (Diagram 14) enrolled 5209 thousand full-time and parttime students, including 282,9 foreigners (5,42% of the total student body). Revenues from the education of foreigners received by the Russian economy over the past 10 years grew 7-fold and


20 totaled RUB 73 billion in 2015 . Yet, when assessing and comparing these indicators one can say that Russian SVE schools still only enroll a limited number of foreigners and their share in the total number of students is growing very slowly (Diagram 15). Are Russian HEI schools ready for a mass education of foreigners? Expert are quite skeptical about that despite the fact that SVE schools have become attractive for young migrants: they open great opportunities for integration, employment and even naturalization. 3

This is in principle the very potential that we are underutilizing today. Experts told us that we had to come and that they wanted and were able to work with us. In reality, though, they are not very serious in their approach, they are not doing much. They keep saying, try to do it on your own. If foreign students don’t who up, whatever… However, for children this is the best way to gain citizenship, the least expensive one, the most reliable one, they enter vocational schools and colleges, and they are given places to live in dormitories. In other words, they get a guaranteed temporary residence registration. A vocational school’s education policy is based on a principle “let everyone in, let no one out,” and reasons for that are clear: over the course of education, one can acquire Russian citizenship. The interview stated that this was the best way to naturalize. However, here is the question: will they have jobs to fill once they graduate? Large employers, particularly, the Uralmash Plant, do not enroll foreigners or migrants for internships. Here the problem is that internships are very important and it is not clear how to go without it: these guys are not taken by plants for internships. IF they are training future electric and gas welders, they have to undergo their internships welding chemical devices... But plants’ security services do not let them in. So, it turns out that migrants stay in the housing and utilities sector where formalities are less important. There were cases where Russian students would take their internships at plants while a couple of migrant welders would be welding in a managing company welding pipes. In this sense, there is an upside to the whole idea, but it will not be possible until migrants gain citizenship, and this is all about discrimination eventually. From expert interviews. Young people from Kyrgyzstan are keen on attending vocational schools: a vocation school provides excellent adaptation and an employable qualification. These are youngsters who already passed the primary adaptation as they have been in Russia with their parents since childhood, and they see a way to integrate in their society. From expert interviews. The problem with mass enrollment of foreigners in Russian SVE schools is understaffing as there are simply not enough professionals who can teach in a world-class manner in SVE schools competitively. I feel like we simply lack professionals. Some instructors passed away, some retired, and the core of the teaching stock simply vanished. Perhaps, such vocational school instructors could be trained at plants that need them, perhaps one can arrange on-the-job instruction courses for prospective instructors just as we used to have them in the past. Today, we have qualified workers and certainly we need a future generation of workers who will replace them. That means that the knowledge, mastery and qualification needs to be transferred from a generation to a generation. From expert interviews. In addition, it is also difficult to reequip vocational school and prepare them for training students in accordance with world standards. This will require major financial investments. We have a serious problem with vocational schools, and there is a similar problem in Kyrgyzstan. Their capacity is inadequate. Since the Soviet times, various regions maintain a direct cooperation between their vocational schools. Their share technologies. Today, vocational schools 3

Arefyev A.L., Sheregi F.E. Exports of Russian Education Services: A Statistical Compilation. Issue 6 / Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. — M.: Sociocenter, 2016.


21 are associated with manufacturing that constantly evolves. And what was relevant, popular and progressive in the 80's, has now become past. We need investments here. One needs to finally start investing into what can help us maintain a competitive edge in the area of labor education. From expert interviews. The following problem that needs to be resolved as part of the transition to the mass training of foreigners in Russian SVE schools is the reimbursement or recovery of funds spent on education of such foreigners. In case of a free-of-charge education paid for by Russian employers, one can see a need for resolving the issue of retaining such educated employee with the employer that spent money on his/her education. This should also be the case even when it is not a full-fledged vocational education but short-term retraining courses (taken at the same SVE school or under a separate arrangement). Due to foreign employee turnover, employers are not keen on investing in their education: there is no guarantee that they will not leave after gaining education. Say, the company right down the street offers more and, voila, that employee is gone. He/she is not interested in building a career, he/she needs money. That employee will simply be lured away… From expert interviews. In case of free-of-charge education paid for by the Russian government, one faces the same problem of spending money that will not result in employees staffing state companies that need professionals trained under free foreign student programs. After receiving education, these foreigners may return home or leave to work in another country. At the same time, Russia is experiencing a major deficit of medium-qualification workforce thus creating a certain standoff between the state and large companies, that while admitting a shortage of labor force, are still unwilling to invest money in its training. They have to be educated here in Russia. Employers on their own can train a workforce in many qualifications that require not several years but 3 or 6 months of training. Today, it’s very difficult to achieve that because no one is willing to spend money on their education. The state doesn’t want to spend money either and the state currently indeed doesn’t have much money for these purposes. Even when it had the money, the state didn’t want to spend it on migrants’ education. It wants businesspeople who need workforce with qualification to train such workforce on their own. Businesses don’t want to spend money either. This tug-of-war continues. There are no specialized courses. Large plants cannot form an order for workforce. Our labor legislation is not conducive to resolving this problem as there is no provision spelling out how an employee is supposed to reimburse the money invested in his/her education. It is less costly to hire youths. If only we trained high school graduates for half a year so that they subsequently worked in our companies, we would have now had all these Tajik and Uzbek guys from poor families. Yet, in such a case we would have to provide them with dormitories and stipends for half a year as was the case at Soviet-era Factory and Plant Schools after the war [World War 2 – D.P.]. The trainees were issued winter clothing, work uniforms and were fed three times a day. All for free. They then, naturally, had to reimburse it to a respective factory or plant with their work. Today, we can train young people, invest money in them, and they will leave for Tajikistan or Uzbekistan to their parents because they are still children. That’s it. There are no legal provisions for the relations between countries. It is their state that has to levy associated costs on their families and remit them to Russia. Today, nobody would do that as it sounds wild. In the meantime, it is not wild, it’s law and order. An employee who was trained and who only worked for a certain plant or factory for just a month or two has not reimbursed anything yet. He learns that there is a place that pays a hundred RUB more and he quits. And there is nothing you can do about it. Even the court cannot make him work for you to compensate to you the money invested into his/her education. What will you do? Transform plants into debt prisons? Here, the enforcement part is imperfect. This is the hindrance to such a form of education. Plants have to set and resolve this issue. Yet, neither plants, nor the wider industry formulate this issue. Even when this issue is raised, it is normally referred to the state as everyone


22 believes that the state has to train workers as it was in the past when the entire workforce was state-educated. That’s it. What do we have today? An employee quits from one plant and goes to another. He as trained and he will still be useful. Here, though, we are talking about migrants, which implies inter-state relations. Russians can assume the burden of training these youths, feeding them and clothing them, but these youngsters, they will leave. This is an expensive endeavor. Today the Ministry of Labor is waiting instructions from the government. Yet, there are no instructions, no one is pressuring them. In the meantime, those plans that truly need qualified workers, they do train such workers. Nobody knows how they manage to retain them. If the salary is good and there are no competitors around, of course they will retain them. However, if anything goes wrong, people will leave without providing the plant that trained them with sufficient compensation in the form of working for it. From expert interviews. A compromise option for the payment for training of prospective migrant workers is possible. When making international treaties between Russia and Central Asian countries, one can consolidate funds from source countries, funds from Russia and funds from the trainee’s family. A collateral here would be property of that trainee’s family, which is exactly the practice maintained by the Bolashak State Education Program in Kazakhstan.4 Government-funded (budget) enrollment is a tough sell. It is simply too long-term an investment. I don’t think the Russian government will go for it. Yet, some kind of sharing education financing sounds like a possibility. A part of the tuition will be paid by the country that sends its trainee, a part would be covered by the employer, and the remainder will be funded by the government of the host country. Such a mechanism can be thought through and launched. This would particularly work for newly created companies. Say, a federal ministry plans to invest in a construction or reconstruction of a certain plant to economically revitalize a certain area. In order to build something and then operate it, one needs labor force, workforce. This has to be calculated. This is not a small or medium business, we are talking about large companies. We can already know how much of what we will need. Partially, it will be federal investments, and partially – investments of the state that is interested in sending its citizens for work. Such a shared education financing could be possible. The problem is there is no specialized service or state assistance. If one was to compare this situation with other countries, one can notice that better trained migrants tend to come to Russia. Eventually, educated people tend to come here, people who still possess the education that was not entirely lost during the post-Soviet era. The problem is not that such a person would have a Russian-issued certificate instead of a Tajik university diploma, but that we will have to help such a teacher of Russian and Russian literature to find a job corresponding to his/her education. We let chance to decide everything. People are looking for high-paying jobs. Animal husbandry does not pay well, the same goes for being a teacher of Russia, and therefore, they all prefer unskilled labor while disregarding all provisions of labor legislation as long as their salaries to be more than RUB 30 000. If the government assumes responsibility for training specialists, its expenditures will eventually pay back in the form of such people becoming more integrated, having a stronger command of Russian and possessing a better qualification. However, it all comes down to the inefficient Russian economy. If the Russian economy developed strongly, it would need more better professionals. Otherwise, graduates would face the fact that the qualification they had gained is not very popular in the labor market. This applies, in particular, to machining and tooling, areas that specifically need an inflow of younger workers. From expert interviews. 4

See the website of the Kazakh ―Bolashak‖ State Education Program – Center for International Programs bolashak.gov.kz


23 The process of training, retraining or certification of prospective migrant workers in compliance with Russian standards at short-term courses in their source countries so that they come to Russia with all proving documents ready is yet to be established. Tajikistan has some experience in short-term courses created by Knauf and GIZ (German Corporation for International Cooperation), however such courses have not become massively popular and they do not involve Russian unions of employers. In addition, such a certification may be in demand on part of large Russian employers, but the involvement of small and medium business, according to experts surveyed, is questionable. One can arrange certification courses, a joint inspection of all education and training institutions in the source country. Teachers from those regions could be certified here so that they teach professionally. Perhaps, one could second representatives of Russian unions of employers to take part in examinations. However, such a scheme can only realistically involve large employers. Small business find it inefficient as they need to contact Kyrgyz citizens [on behalf of Russia – D.P.] and migrants directly. One needs to provide for mechanisms of direct relations with migrants bypassing employers because an employer is not always the most important figure here. One needs to establish inter-state relations, there is a capacity for that as part of EEU. That capacity existed even as part of CIS, so nothing really changed here in principle. One has to arrange a certification system – the easiest mechanism that already exists as part of EEU, the recognition of diplomas. Goal-oriented people can find job consistent with their qualification. Certification is important and that applies to other professions that require staying highly qualified, but that has to be coordinated with the Ministry of Education – now who is responsible for this? How do we do it in the technical sense? We virtually lack opportunities for people to graduate from something and have an expedited degree certified. From expert interviews. According to experts, there are structural difficulties that prevent SVE schools from working with foreign students: those vocational schools that lack their own dormitories tend to not maintain a staff position of a passport officer, who in dormitory-equipped colleges can handle documents of foreign students. Expanding staff to hire such a passport officer will require a special permission and certain conditions on part of the SVE school administration. It is evident that if even such an initiative becomes an obstacle for SVE schools, it is way too early to talk about any serious structural rebuilding of SVE schools on their own so as to mass enroll foreigners. The teachers’ college really wanted to train foreigners but they don’t have a position of a passport officer. They lack their own dormitory and, consequently, they never had any paperwork filing and registration issues. In the meantime, colleges that have their own dormitories have passport officers. These passport officers resolve all issues, that’s their job, nothing special. In other words, such issues are never dramatized there, for them it’s quite normal. From expert interviews. There is another problem for foreign students of SVE schools: internships. This problem is resolved dependent on local settings, using established connections and relations of SVE schools. However, in the case of mass enrollment of foreigners, this problem has to be resolved at the systemic and enforcement levels and an appropriate mechanism has to be introduced and perfected. Now if it’s Tajiks – citizens of Russia – studying in vocational schools, there are no problems. They are sent for internships and they work there. In particular, in the medical college, we have no problems at all. There, foreign citizens freely approach state hospitals if necessary. They have no problems there. From expert interviews. Experts also expressed concern about the issue of the psychological preparedness of administration and faculty of Russian SVE schools for the mass enrollment of foreigners. Under such an approach, it will be difficult to talk about readiness of SVE schools for entry into the international market for education services. Unlike HEI schools, some of which have already transitioned to the


24 enrollment of foreigners, Russian SVE schools lack plans for dealing with foreigners in the medium and long run. If this becomes a mass action, I am really not sure if they can resolve this problem. Firstly, there is an issue of the faculty, because there are peculiarities here. Secondly, it’s the curriculum. In other words, it’s one thing when two persons [foreigners – D.P.] sit and we understand there are another twenty Russians in the class. Teachers openly say that there are major problems: some of them don’t speak Russian at all, some speak a little Russian but their vernacular is weak at best. Now the instructors are supposed to explain to them how to turn a machine on and how to move its arm. Trainers frequently have to explain that by hands, gesturing. Now if this truly becomes a mass phenomenon, there will be conflicts. And I believe that there are problems with methodological support of the training process. We can no longer count on the kind Marina Petrovna (a stereotype of a kind teacher) who will stay after hours to explain the content of the class [to foreigners – D.P.], how and what to do. What kind of competitive edge at the global level can we be talking about here? We are training personnel for an adjacent plant and our scale of thinking is our city of Yekaterinburg. Federal universities, just like all other HEI schools, have to urgently make international rankings so that foreigners deem them worthy of entering. Yet, they are not ready for enrollment, they fail to understand what foreign students are seeking. In short, we have massive problems here. Here, one can see a whole different story emerging: let them come, it’s not like we are frustrated about that, and then we’ll see what happens next. We are not going to make effort to ensure that, nor are we willing to invest anything into this. If foreign students come, let it be. We teach anyone. Therefore, if a regular foreigner wishes to come and study, let it be so, better for us. From expert interviews. The last thing worth noting is the need for the development of programs of state support for education of migration in SVE schools. The arrangement of communication and awareness raising, promotion of Russian schools in migrant source countries and the arrangement of education expos is something that will be much more effective under a programmatic approach and with the involvement of the Russian government. They really don’t do it themselves although they understand that one can recruit from overseas. Again, this implies expenditures for the vocational school. Who will be traveling overseas to promote the vocational school? Still, they are all dependent on the school’s budget: the more students are enrolled, the better the budget – everything depends on this. However, this needs to be decided in the Labor Department, in the Ministry of Labor, in the very schools. This is what we have to work. At any rate, some kind of support is needed. If only it were organized at the level of the Tajik Government. However, the government is not interested in this as it only wants to make sure its vocational schools are packed with students. At the same time, the diplomas they issue are not popular in Russia, nobody in Russia needs such Tajik diplomas. In addition, back home, the instruction is in Tajik, while here they have to study in Russia, which of course is a major advantage. Everybody wants to get funding from foreign organizations to finance their education institutions, sort of to promote them and ensure higher quality of instruction. Back in the past, IOM invested into this, and GIZ, there is such a German organization… In Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, they funded several education institutions, including an adult retraining facility. I went to those courses and I can say they are good for nothing. They have training equipment but they lack professionals who can teach you something valuable. A teacher of theory and a teacher of practice are two whole different things. You cannot compare them to Russians. In addition, here vocational schools train you for the domestic labor market. And young people take internships at those plants and in those companies that eventually hire them. If you are referred, you are hired. As early as when you are still at school, you get selected and you will get a job. It depends on you desire to learn, on your abilities. From expert interviews.


25 Diagram 16. Distribution of respondents by form of preparation for departure for Russia (%)

Diagram 17.1. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 17.2. Distribution of respondents by degree of command of the Russian language to degree of command of the Russian language to successfully communicate at work (%) successfully complete paperwork (%)

Diagram 17.3. Distribution of respondents by degree Diagram 18. Distribution of respondents by of command of the Russian language to successfully desire to continue studying the Russian communicate at stores, pharmacies, mail office (%) language (%)


26 Diagram 18.2. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 19. Distribution of respondents by desire to continue studying the Russian language place of education (%) (%)

Diagram 19.2. Distribution of Kyrgyz respondents Diagram 19.3. Distribution of Tajik respondents by place of education (%) by place of education (%)

Diagram 20. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 20.2 Distribution of Tajik respondents qualification enhancement in Russia (%) by professional retraining in Russia (%)


27 Diagram 20.3. Distribution of Kyrgyz respondents by professional retraining in Russia (%)

Diagram 21. Distribution of respondents by question of advisability of securing a higher level of education in Russia and its benefit for the future life in Russia (a higher income, better employment opportunities, etc.) (%)


28 Diagram 21.2. Distribution of respondents by question of advisability of securing a higher level of education in Russia and its benefit for the future life in Russia (a higher income, better employment opportunities, etc.) (%)


29 4. Work in Russia by migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan The utilization of professional skills of labor migrants depends on the Russian-built system of use of professional skills of Russian citizens that too are inefficiently utilized. There is a lack of established mechanisms of labor exchanges (workforce database and platform), there is a dearth of information about popular occupations and expanded projections of demand for best occupations, there are no set standards of work. Positive examples, though, include the Multifunctional Migration Center in the village of Sakharovo that between 2015 and 2016 achieved some major progress in developing its operations, and by 2016 commenced building a special structure to secure employment for migrant workers (Diagram 42-46). The first job Central Asian migrants find in Russia usually does not correspond to the education they have: this was stated by 65% of respondents. Only every fifth respondent was able to utilize his/her education at his/her first job in Russia, while only 14% of respondents managed to utilize it at least partially (Table 23, Diagram 22). The overwhelming majority of migrants take jobs that offered to them. They cannot be picky, they are already happy to be employed. They are yard keepers and security booth operators. The important thing is to get a jog, some kind of income. It may seem that there are a lot of migrants, but there are really not that many qualified construction workers: “Load more and throw farther” – there are many workers of this kind. And to have a system where an unqualified worker is trained into a qualified one, the system is simply not there yet. From expert interviews. In a distant future, when the Russian Federation chooses the Korean or Singaporean path, there will be diversified jobs for labor migrants, there will be some kind of ladder of opportunities, a ladder of qualification growth, an opportunity to learn a new profession. However, in this sense, my projections are rather bleak. We are so far away from getting there. From expert interviews. Such a non-rational use of the existing migrants’ potential is triggered by several causes. The Russian labor market is experiencing a shortage of low-qualification and medium-qualification workers,5 and therefore migrants can only find jobs consistent with their education and qualification; yet, even such an opportunity is currently only available to Kyrgyz migrants whose diplomas are now recognized in Russia as part of the Eurasian Economic Union. However, the difference in Russian and Kyrgyz education standards and mistrust by Russian employers of the quality of education in CIS counties still act as obstacles to the hiring of Kyrgyz citizens in Russia. There are teachers, not only Tajik but also Uzbek migrants, that are forced to work here as masons, foundation pit diggers, and operators in other low-skill jobs. This is not only because their Russian is poor but also there are different standards. From expert interviews. There is another reason why the capacity of Central Asian labor migrants is underutilized: themselves prefer to choose harder and/or less qualified jobs as long as they pay more and are easier to find. A teacher or a plant worker may pay less compared to the hard labor demanded from a construction worker that, in addition, creates opportunities for side income or overtime. The study showed that labor migration is still largely a life strategy: an overwhelming majority of migrants claimed that they spent almost the whole year working in Russia and return home for just one to three months (73% of respondents), or stay in Russia almost all the time (23%). 5

Bondarenko N.V. and M.D. Krasilnikova (2014). Labor Market and Professional Education – What Is the Mechanism for Cooperation? ―Monitoring of Economics of Education‖ Information Newsletter, issue #8 (31). 2014 http://www.hse.ru/data/2014/06/24/1310217428/ИБ%20МЭО%20№1%20(75)%202014%20(2).pdf; Shokhin A. (2013). Business Choked by Understaffing – ―Rossiyskaya Gazeta‖ Newspaper. 19.03. Available from http://www.rg.ru/2013/03/19/biznes.html


30 An average duration of a break between departures for Russia generally doesn’t exceed two months (Table 26, Diagram 25). About two thirds of respondents found jobs in organizations and firms, while 31% are privately employed. Individual entrepreneurs account for just 2% of respondents (Tables 27, 27.2, Diagram 26, 26.2). Interestingly, there are twice as many Tajik migrants that are privately employed compared to their Kyrgyz counterparts (40% v. 21%). Just as interestingly, women tend to be more frequently privately employed compared to men: 48% v. 38% among Tajik migrants and 26% v. 19% among Kyrgyz migrants. Over the past 7-8 years, there was a major differentiation in the areas of employment: previously, trade and construction dominated,6 yet today, the range of areas of employment for labor migrants in Russia is much wider although it still does not correspond to the diversity of jobs back at migrants’ source countries. The structure of employment of Central Asian migrants is gradually becoming differentiated but that differentiation depends on the source country and gender of migrants. Here, Tajik migrants tend to be more frequently engaged in unskilled labor jobs compared to their Kyrgyz counterparts: 32% of Tajik migrants are employed in construction compared to just 12% of Kyrgyz migrants. On the other hand, 28% of Kyrgyz migrants are employed in the services sector compared to just 19% of Tajik migrants. About a quarter of Tajik and Kyrgyz migrants work in retail and wholesale trade (Tables 28, 28.2, Diagram 27, 27.2, 27.3). For Tajik men construction is the prevailing area as 43% of the work in the construction, while only 17% of Kyrgyz men are employed in this area. At the same time, women from these two countries rarely work in construction (1% - 2% of surveyed women). The services sector sees three times the number of Tajik women compared to Tajik men (39% v. 12%), while among Kyrgyz migrants such a gender gap is not as pronounced - 38% v. 23%. The biggest gender gap in areas of employment between men and women is observed in private household services. Here, 17% of Tajik women and 10% of Kyrgyz women work in this industry, while the numbers for men are 5% and 3% respectively. There are more Kyrgyz drivers (12%) than Tajik drivers (8%), while there are almost no drivers among women (1% and 2% respectively). Traditionally, there are more women in trade than men. This is typical for both Kyrgyz and Tajik migrants. 32% of both Tajik and Kyrgyz women work in this area, while 25% of Tajik men and 22% of Kyrgyz men found employment in this economic sector. They either dig or sweep or roll artificial grass. These are dirty, low-skill jobs. They (women) are either yard keepers or cleaners. I think if not for them, we wouldn’t have been able to find people to do those jobs. It’s because Russians have other jobs to fill and there are enough of them. Migrants are some kind of magic stick. Those Kyrgyz migrants that work in the cleaning industry agree to any salary. Where employers are Vietnamese or Chinese, it creates an interesting situation. Kyrgyz migrants are happy they are getting paid, and that suits both parties. Kyrgyz migrants still receive a higher salary compared to what they would have otherwise earned being employed by a Russia company. The Vietnamese, in turn, are happy that it is Kyrgyz migrants that become their employees because a Vietnamese worker would cost much more: both in terms of paperwork and remuneration. Therefore, here, if only Vietnamese employers knew they could pay less to Kyrgyz migrants, they would have paid less. They are satisfied with the current level of remuneration. I think those Kyrgyz migrants that work for the Vietnamese make 30-40% more. The primary benefit for the employers is that such employees do not need an employment patent. The country is in the state of crisis, and jobs that used to exist simply disappeared and employers no longer can pay more. From expert interviews. Table 1. Distribution of employed population by type of economic activity on average per annum (pursuant to data of sample-based surveys on employment issues) in the Russian Federation in 2015 6

Poletaev D.V. (2004) Regional Aspects of Illegal Migration to Russia // Problem of Illegal Migration in Russia: Realities and Search for Solutions (findings of a sociological study) IOM, IOM Bureau in Russia, M.: Gendalf - p. 45160.


31 Total

Males

Females

Total 100 100 100 Agriculture and forestry, hunting, fishing 6,7 8,2 5,1 and fishery Mining 2,1 3,3 0,8 Manufacturing 14,3 17,0 11,4 Generation and distribution of 3,2 4,6 1,8 electricity, gas and water Construction 7,6 12,7 2,2 Wholesale and retail, repair of cars, motorcycles, household appliances and 18,4 13,2 23,9 personal-use items, hotels and restaurants Transportation and communications 9,5 13,8 5,0 Financial activity, transactions in real 9,4 9,6 9,2 property, rent and services Public administration and military 7,4 8,5 6,2 security, social work Education 9,2 3,2 15,5 Healthcare and social services 7,9 3,2 12,9 Other types of economic activities 4,3 2,6 6,0 Source: Rosstat http://www.gks.ru/wps/wcm/connect/rosstat_main/rosstat/ru/statistics/wages/labour_force/# When comparing employment of migrants (Tables 28, 28.2, Diagrams 27, 27.2, 27.3) and Russians (Table 1), we can observe serious difference. Here, while only 8% of Russians are employed in the construction sector, 12% of migrants are employed there, and 32% of Tajik migrants. 18% of Russians are employed in trade and retail, while a whopping 50% of migrants are employed by that sector; and 10% of Russians are employed in transportation and communications while 7% of migrants work in that sector. Job search strategies continue to revolve around using resources of migrants’ social networks: this was stated by 69% of respondents. Kyrgyz migrants employed in a wider range of occupations are less likely to rely on assistance of migrants’ social networks, including relatives, friends or acquaintances (64% v. 74%). At the same time, Kyrgyz migrants search for job via newspapers ads, radio and TV more frequently than their Tajik counterparts (12% v. 7%) or via Internet classifieds (11% v. 5%). Private employment agencies recruitment agencies are used by migrants infrequently: no more than 4% of respondents claimed to have used their services (Table 29, Diagram 28). Not only do Kyrgyz women utilize the help of migrants’ social networks less frequently than their Tajik counterparts (61% v. 74%), but also even less frequently than Kyrgyz men (65%). They actively look for jobs in newspaper, radio and TV ads (16%) or via Internet classifieds (12%). Migrants normally look for jobs though an established system: they learn about them from friends, relatives and acquaintances. For instance, only village fellows can help you get a certain job. This is the only way to get a job, there is no other. I haven’t seen anybody being hired just after a walk-in, without anybody vouching for you. They all come via somebody else: they were brought in by their friends, relatives, village fellows. 28 years old, Tajik man (of Pamiri ethnicity), Moscow According to our study’s findings (Tables 30, 30.2, Diagrams 29, 29.2), 71% of Kyrgyz migrants have a written contract with their employers. Among Tajiks, only 42% of respondents


32 claimed they had a written contract with their employers. At the same time, 43% of Kyrgyz migrants receive their salaries officially, while among Tajiks (Tables 38, 38.2, Diagrams 37, 37.2) this number is twice as less (24%). So, more than a half of written contracts with employers are not registered by labor migrants. Gender differences among respondents from both source countries are insignificant. As numerous Migration Research Center studies showed,7 a lack of a contract with employer is mostly a decision of a migrant. Here, Так, of those who did not have a contract with their employers, only 42% claimed that it was their employer who refused to make such a contract. Well, you know, I don’t have a contract yet, I am nominally employed. I was paid for the first month, now I am not sure how it goes after this. No, nobody made any contract with me. I don’t think they will be worse financially. See, I was hired as an additional employee, perhaps for a small salary, it probably should have been higher. Overall, a contract here cannot be used. If we demand a contract or any papers for that matter, it will be bad, we will be fired or not hired. It’s better to not talk about it. You finish your work, you leave. And every time you think, will I get paid? The pay may be delayed. 50 years old, Tajik woman, Moscow Take a private hairdresser’s salon for instance. When you have such a small company, you need your personnel to work cohesively with no scandals. If they file their papers, they will incur expenses for the registration, and it costs money. and they will leave your company for another employer that offers RUB 50 more for the same job. And there is nothing you can do about it. If you go to court, to spend ten times the amount. From expert interviews. It is important to take into account that migrants fall under the same system and framework as average Russians. Once the entire workforce is legal, migrants will become legal because rules will start to work. Rules have to be introduced with respect to one’s own people not foreigners. Migrants follow the established rules. They see what arrangements other around them utilize. There are cases of employers failing to pay. There is a lot of swindling, especially on construction sites and harvesting fields because 50% of employees lack employment contracts. Therefore, they are sometimes swindled. Even if they make that contract, the remuneration stated is minimal. Contracts are frequently prepared in such a manner that they lack details of the employer. They only carry a stamp and signature. The Main State Registration Number and Registration Code. Migrants usually don’t have any contract, anything for that matter. And when they approach you with this matter, they want somebody to pursue their interests, to go and make things happen, act as a collector and get that money. they are quite negative about legal ways. Brought it to the prosecutor’s office, but only did so because he works for my acquaintance, “my acquaintance asked me to handle this.” They don’t want to go anywhere and realistically fail to even take paperwork done for them to the court of law. Very few people go for the end, and those who do, they achieve results, but that really happens rarely. They don’t want to go to court and resolve everything, so they don’t resolve anything. Usually they simply swallow the tough cookie and that’s it. They don’t learn from their mistakes, so nest time they fail to make a contract again. The prosecutor’s office generally takes such cases if they know anything about their employers: address, name. In such a case, there is something that the prosecutor’s office can check.

7

See Tyuryukanova, E.V., et al. Female Migrants from CIS in Russia. Series: Migration Barometer in the Russian Federation. Moscow: MAKS Press 2011; Zayonchkovskaya, J., et al. Household Workers in Russia and Kazakhstan. Almaty: UN Women, Ex Libris. 2014


33 However, people are not used to resolve things legally. They believe that somebody has to do this for them, and if that’s not possible, then let it be. Then, that’s how life goes. From expert interviews. 50% of surveyed migrants claimed (Table 31, 31.2, Diagram 30, 30.2) that they didn't need an employment contract. Such a decision is prompted not only by their inability to contest breaches of labor legislation in Russian courts but also, for instance (and this is typical of household workers), mutual risks of a verbal contract with the employer. Breaches of a verbal contract entail major losses for both the employer (disloyalty of employees and a decrease in workmanship), and for the employee (a possibility of a premature termination, fines, loss of prospects for a long-term cooperation with the employer). Not all Kyrgyz migrants have a contact, although it implies its own benefits and is generally needed. In order for them to extend their registration, they need a contract. And yet, they say they don’t have a contract and that they don’t need a contract. This is very strange. They need it to legally stay in the country. If Tajiks lack a contract I assume they don’t know that their employment patent was annulled. If they fail to produce a valid contract with an employer within three months, their employment patent is automatically annulled. In addition, there are various “hole-in-the-wall companies” that prepare false contracts for money. There are cases where six months passes before people find out that their employment patent was annulled. But they only find out about that when they go to extend it or when they are leaving Russia or attempting to enter Russia and learn that they are denied entry to Russia. They most likely are unaware of that. From expert interviews. About 11% of migrants work in places where local residents are mostly employed; 29% are in workplaces that sport an equal number of Russians and migrants. 43% of respondents are part of mostly migrant-dominated personnel; 17% of respondents work alone. This indicator illustrates that compared to Tajiks, Kyrgyz migrants are more likely to compete with Russians for jobs. Here, 13% of Kyrgyz migrants have Russians as coworkers, while only 8% of Tajik migrants can say so. Here, Kyrgyz women are more likely than Kyrgyz men to be part of in Russian-dominated personnel (Table 32. Diagram 31). 31% of respondents mentioned competition on part of local residents and that they compete for their jobs. 45% of migrants claimed that local residents do not take jobs they work. 24% of respondents failed to answer this question. There are no Russians at my workplace. Perhaps, there would be if the pay was better. We work to survive, to pay for our beds. Russians will never agree to work such a hard job for that measly money. We work every day, we have not Saturdays or Sundays. We only have lunch and night. That’s it. 50 years old, Tajik woman, Moscow Competition on part of local residents is reported by Kyrgyz migrants to a higher degree (34%) compared to their Tajik counterparts (28%). At the same time, gender difference in both countries is insignificant (Tables 33, 33.2, Diagrams 32, 32.2). Migrants generally earn fine. When they say that Russians will not take such jobs, I personally disagree. If the salary is RUB 35 - 40 thousand, Russian citizens wouldn’t object to such a job. It’s whole different story if all your coworkers are migrants – Russians will not take such a job then. From expert interviews. Average monthly income in Russia at all jobs is RUB 28 368. Men tend to earn more than women - RUB 29 846 v. RUB 24 825. Tajik migrants tend to earn slightly more than Kyrgyz migrants RUB – 28 863 v. RUB 27 967.


34 The main reasons for lack of job satisfaction include low income (72%), physically hard labor (57%), and a lengthy workday and lack of days off (38%), poor working conditions (poorly equipped workspace, poor equipment, dirt, etc.) - 22%. Reasons for lack of job satisfaction vary dependent on the source country. Tajiks are most dissatisfied with the physical nature of hard jobs compared to their Kyrgyz counterparts (60% v. 51%) (Table 37, Diagram 37.2). In addition, Tajiks are more dissatisfied with low income compared to Kyrgyz migrants (75% v. 69%). This is due to the fact that, while earning more, Tajiks tent to work a higher number of days per week compared to their Kyrgyz counterparts. Here, on average, Tajiks work 5,85 days a week, while Kyrgyz migrants only work 5,57 days a week. The average value in the sample was 5,71 days per week. At the same time, Kyrgyz migrants work 10,77 hours per day while Tajik migrants work 10,21 hours. Men generally work more days per week compared to women – 5,8 days v. 5,54 days (Tables 39, 40, Diagram 38, 39). Judging by respondents’ answers, it is Tajik men who are most engaged in physical hard work (66% of them mentioned it as a reason for lack of job satisfaction). Only 40% of Tajik women mentioned that. Tajik women are dissatisfied with their low income: as stated by 80% of them. 74% of Tajik men concurred; with 71% of Kyrgyz women stating the same; and 67% of Kyrgyz men stating the same. Today, I am glad I found a job. One cannot be unhappy about having a job, plus I knew where I was going and I knew it wouldn’t be easy. I was emotionally ready for this. I am glad to have any job. I am a migrant, and migrants are migrants in any country – we have to hope for a better job until we become citizens. I do wish I faced a better treatment and attitude on part of people, though. 50 years old, Tajik woman, Moscow Overall, no more than a third of respondents received salaries as per an official pay slip or via a bank credited to their bank cards (Tables 38, 38.2, Diagram 37). 55% get their salaries in cash; partially officially - 10%. 43% of Kyrgyz migrants stated they were receiving their salaries officially while there are twice as fewer of their Tajik counterparts who can claim the same (24%). There are more men who receive their salaries legally compared to women: 35% v. 28%. Among Tajik men, 25% receive salaries officially; among Tajik women - 18%; among Kyrgyz men - 46%, among Kyrgyz women - 36%. So far, I haven’t been [cheated– D.P.], but my son has and quite often so. He would work for 2 weeks, and then they fire everyone without paying anything. You come to work and you see doors locked. There were many cases like that. I worked as a construction worker, as a yard keeper, as a welder. They never say anything. They demand that a job be done, but they fail to pay. And there is nothing you can do about it. Where will you go? We have nowhere and nobody to complain to. 50 years old, Tajik woman, Moscow Despite the fact that employers no longer seize migrants’ passports, up to 6% of respondents stated that they were not able to easily quit. This is definitely a risk group for human trafficking and labor slavery. There were 8% of such cases among Tajik migrants; 5% among Kyrgyz migrants; among men - 7%; among women - 5%. There were 9% of such cases among Tajik men, Kyrgyz men - 4%. Among Tajik women - 4%, among Kyrgyz women - 5% (Tables 41, 41.2, Diagrams 40, 40.2). Serious repressive measures again violators of migration procedures made migrants more careful and meticulous in their compliance with the Russian migration laws. The majority of them had a valid migration card (99%) and a detachable ticket for migration accounting and registration (98%). Among Tajik migrants that had to get an employment patent, 88% hold one. Medical insurance is held by 91% of Tajik migrants and 74% of Kyrgyz migrants (Tables 42, 42.2, Diagram 41, 41.2). The 2015 amendments brought about by the accession of the Kyrgyz Republic to the Eurasian Economic Union liberalized conditions of Kyrgyz migrants’ employment in Russia. Effective summer 2015, Kyrgyz migrants no longer need to get employment patents to work in Russia.


35 As to whether it became easier for Kyrgyz migrants to secure employment? I think yes, to a certain degree, as employers now find it easier to register citizens of EEU so as to minimize their payroll taxes. Kyrgyz migrants are now, just like Russian citizens, subject to 13% income tax. It became easier, yes. It is easier for employers now to register Kyrgyz migrants on their payroll: they no longer need to secure employment patents. The first time they arrive in Russia, they file for registration, and then on the basis of an employment contract via their employers they can extend their stay in Russia for 1 year. Migrants walk the streets and work their jobs as confidently as myself. 32 years old, Kyrgyz woman, Moscow According to 45% of Kyrgyz migrants, employment has become easier to formalize. 31% of Kyrgyz migrants believe that it became somewhat easier to formalize employment and only 8% of Kyrgyz respondents can feel almost no difference; and only 5% saw no changes in the process of formalizing employment (Table 43, Diagram 47). Kyrgyz migrants are in a much more advantageous position compared to Tajik and Uzbek migrants due to the family situation, long-term planning and their social position. In the economic sense, however, nothing has changed. Speaking of Kyrgyz migrants, many of them speak with virtually no to their Russian, and therefore can apply for a position of a waiter in a restaurant. In Moscow, you can see a lot of Kyrgyz waiters in cafes and restaurants. Cafes employ girls too, not just boys, but in restaurants you will only see boys waiting tables. It is impossible to imagine a Tajik manning that position. In addition, Kyrgyz girls operate cashiers in supermarkets. These days, vacancy ads tend to clearly state that citizens of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan are wanted. Tajik and Uzbek migrants see competition from Kyrgyz migrants. Their situation has become easier these days. Kyrgyz migrants experience problems in the sense that there are no intermediaries that could file for their migration registration; owners of apartments where they live fail to register them at their places of residence. In particular, the Multifunctional Migration Center in the village of Sakharovo they are denied registration because they lack employment patents. Migrants find themselves in a precarious situation: if they do not file for registration если, they will gain a status of illegal migrants. They don’t know which authority to address with respect to this problem. Jobs they take remain the same, really. Perhaps, Kyrgyz migrants are more popular because employers now no longer need to file for employment patents or other things. You go and notify the migration service that I am employing Kyrgyz migrants and that’s it. Kyrgyz migrants tend to work on the basis of forged contracts. Not employers are willing to sign employment contracts. And if there are no employment contract, there is no registration. In reality, they work in totally different places. But, this seems to go fine. Employers are reluctant to issue employment contracts even to Russian-speaking citizens of Kazakhstan. Go and work. We will not give you any employment contract as we will then have to pay taxes. This means that taxes applicable are exactly those that Russians are paying unless the employer starts to think of another problem. Undoubtedly, Kyrgyz migrants now feel much more confident at least because they avoid interaction with police. However, if you look at it from the perspective of the state, one will have to admit that all Kyrgyz migrants are basically an illegal labor force whom nobody ever registered. Nobody will be held liable so why prepare a contract. We have cleaning services – most manned by Kyrgyz migrants who solidified themselves in this market niche. У we have a lot of Chinese factories and shops. So, they started hiring Kyrgyz migrants. This is easy to explain: it is expensive to bring a Vietnamese or a Chinese’s in Bishkek while the exchange rate [USD to RUB – D.P.] increased in Bishkek and salaries will not have to be paid in dollars so as to pay for their own apartment. People started orienting at Kyrgyz migrants.


36 The Vietnamese themselves went to them. By the way, Vietnam has a no-vas treaty with Kyrgyzstan, so they traveled to Bishkek, Osh, and are looking for seamstresses whom they bring to our clothing shops, and our plants. The plants where Vietnamese used to work – tillermen, foremen. Seamstresses, though came from Kyrgyzstan. Kyrgyz migrants’ situation in the labor market didn’t really change because the situation in the labor market is not determined by employment patents. If there is demand, there is supply. It’s pure economics. It’s the employer who decides whether or not an employment patent is needed. They frequently work jobs like washing floors, washing dishes – that’s pretty much it. Here, it depends on your arrangement with the employer. To say that Kyrgyz migrants rushed to legalize their work and presence just because it might be easier and safer because of that would be wrong. Those who were working illegally before and never paid much attention to procedures of legalization continued working illegally. Those who strived for working legally and transparently continue to do so. The employment patent system never really brought any significant changes. It is understood that the employment patent system became safer for the employer. Previously, one needed to file quotas, agree them, etc. which triggered corruption. Today, though, the story shifted to the migrant: it's now his responsibility rather than the employer's. If a migrant needs this permit, let him run around and secure one for himself, so it kind of became easier. Market mechanisms are poorly developed. It is beneficial to Russia. It is beneficial to the state: a major workforce is being supplied. That impacts how much of it is needed. The country is in an economic crisis these days, so we no longer need as many migrant workers as we did in the past. They left, well good. In future, there will be another shortage of labor and they will come back. In other words, there is some kind of self-regulation to this flow. They became legal because they are now holding more documents. However, it’s a “gray” type of legality as they are still not fully registered. From expert interviews. Russia has a rather large informal economy and a part of migrants move there to find employment since they are willing to sacrifice social guarantees to secure jobs and wages which makes them an attractive workforce for shady employers. If one no longer needs to buy an employment patent, one ne longer has to pay money, which is good, which means that you can apply for a job with your passport being enough. That means that a migrant can indeed have more opportunities. He/she can go and work in a store or wherever. He/she can work almost anywhere. So, the question is whether it is good for Russians? Competition grows: in Kyrgyzstan living standards are lower and migrants are willing to work for a lower salary. It’s all about dumping. However, it all depends in the employer. A Tajik worker may be cheaper to carry, especially if he/she is the “shadow economy” type. An illegal migrant is a useful migrant. It’s convenient when you can underpay them, threaten them by saying “look, I am going to call the Federal Migration Service and you will be deported.” So, work for 12 hours instead of 8. The better migrants are protected from the perspective of social legislation, the more expensive he/she becomes for his/her employer: he/she can demand a higher salary so he/she becomes less attractive. therefore Поэтому, under such a system, Tajiks are more appealing. Employers that originally didn’t want to have any problems and it is better for business to carry a Kyrgyz migrant than a Russian migrant as he/she is more motivated than Russian are him/her of those who tend to find balance on a rope, simply because they are no in position to defend their right. Anything can be tied to this Concept. This Concept was signed in 2012. For the past three to four years, the Federal Migration Service worked to draft that Concept. And what did it achieve? It created employment patents that are difficult and expensive to secure. Does thing Concept really improve migration attractiveness of Russia? Does this ensure an inflow of labor resources to the Russian labor market? No, absolutely no. We are facing a phenomenon where migrants find it


37 increasingly more difficult and more expensive to pass official procedures. Moreover, a million and a half of them are potentially blacklisted and have no opportunity and cannot enter Russia. What happens next? They will keep entering Russia, although illegally. We already are witnesses to the fact that there are people engaged in cross-border movement of people. And we will have the worst form of migration when people will not have even a passport, as the passport doesn’t yield them anything, so they cannot really enter Russia. Previously, migrants could enter Russia legally and at least they had passports. Today, they have become illegals stayed stay here without a contract and without a registration. So we have faced the worst type of illegal migration, when everything is becoming illegal, from entry to employment. This is a nightmare. From expert interviews. Lack of proper open statistics hinders research of processes taking place in the Russian labor market and migrants’ place in it. The transfer of these accounting and statistics functions to the Ministry of Internal Affairs really deprived us of statistics. The statistics that we had earlier showed that the migration increased from countries that became members of EEU despite the economic crisis since rules of employment were simplified and a partial amnesty was granted. The number of migrants grew and remittances stayed the same really. The countries that didn’t join EEU today send less migrants to Russia. As a result, their remittances fell drastically. Yet, the capacity is not infinite. We understand that migration from Kyrgyzstan has been increasing. Yet, it cannot grow indefinitely. Still, the effect of their joining EEU will be limited in duration and will stop at some point. From expert interviews. Therefore, data on foreigners staying in Russia are more or less regular and open. These data show an increase in the migration flows in the EEU Member States. Table 2. Stay by foreign citizens from EEU Member States in the Russian Federation (dates and number of individuals) 04.02.14 20.01.15 04.05.15 01.01.16 01.03.16 01.05.16 01.08.16 Armenia 499084 480017 491501 474527 469481 490850 528399 Belarus 506759 517828 404218 648895 650809 704297 727679 Kazakhstan 581516 597559 559379 642808 624512 553491 597204 Kyrgyzstan 554808 544956 539108 552207 572759 561756 576020 Source: A Monthly Monitoring of Socioeconomic Position and Wellbeing of Population: 2015 – August 2016. / Russian Academy of People’s Economy and Civil Service under President of the Russian Federation; ed. T.M. Maleva. 2016 http://www.ranepa.ru/images/docs/monitoring/ekmonitoring/; Table 3. Number of citizens of EEU Member States working in the Russian Federation (x1000 individuals) As at late December 2014 As at late December 2015 Armenia 124,5 286,7 Belarus 3,5 4,3 Kazakhstan 187,0 113,8 Kyrgyzstan 354,0 430,8 Source - Aliyev S.B. Labor Migration and Social Security of Migrant Workers in the Eurasian Economic Union of the Eurasian Economic Commission 2016 http://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/Documents/spreads.pdf


38 Legal instruments governing labor migration in EEU Treaty Section XXVI ―Labor Migration‖ of the Treaty on Eurasian Economic Community. Annex #30 ―Protocol on Medical Assistance to Workers of EEU Member States and Members of Their Families.‖ Agreement Agreement on Cooperation in Countering Illegal Labor Migration from Third Countries dated 19 November 2010. Concept Concept of the Draft International Treaty on Cooperation in Pension Coverage (as approved by Decision of the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission dated 12 November 2014 #103). Rights of Workers of EEU Member States Labor market: Workers of EEU Member States work in EEU without any restrictions associated with the protection of the domestic labor market. Workers do not need a permit to work and work is performed on the basis of a civil and legal contract. Migration accounting: Citizens, workers of EEU Member States and members of their families have the right to stay in the territory of another EEU Member State without registration for 30 days. The period of effect of an employment or civil and legal contract determines the period of a temporary stay by workers and members of their families. Social security: For purposes of social security, the accumulated years of service are taken into account (including the period of social insurance coverage). Citizens of EEU Member States are subject to the national treatment in the area of social security / social insurance. Taxation: Income of workers of EEU Member States are subject to taxation of the EEU Member State in which they work with these taxes being identical to taxes of residents. Education: There is a mutual recognition of diplomas and qualification of citizens of EEU Member States. Children of workers of EEU Member States have the right to attend preschool institutions in compliance with laws of the country of employment of these citizens. Healthcare: Emergency and quick medical aid is available to workers of EEU Member States and members of their families on conditions of the receipt of medical aid by citizens of the State in which they are employed (for free), irrespective of their possession of a medical insurance. Pension coverage: Treaty of Mandatory Payment of Pension Contributions and Exportation of Pensions is being developed. Legal instruments already developed to govern pension coverage of EEU Member States’ citizens  Draft ―Treaty on Pension Coverage of Workers of EEU Member States‖ - under development.  Draft ―Agreement among Authorized Bodies of EEU Member States on the Implementation of the ―Treaty on Pension Coverage of Workers of EEU Member States.‖  Regulations on communication in the implementation of the Treaty on Pension Coverage of Workers of EEU Member States and the Agreement among Authorized Bodies of EEU Member States on the Implementation of the ―Treaty on Pension Coverage of Workers of EEU Member States. We can actually see here that even if the number of migrants grew, their income didn’t decline as much. That means that they are in a better position today to find jobs. Employers naturally find it easier to have an employee without a contract. For a Kyrgyz citizen, this situation is comfortable. Employers find it beneficial as we understand that they utilize gray schemes of employment and taxation. However, these gray schemes suit both sides.


39 Diagram 22. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 22.2. Distribution of respondents correspondence of their first job to their education (%) by correspondence of their first job to their education (%)

Diagram 23. Distribution of respondents by type of departure for work (%)

Diagram 23.2. Distribution of respondents by type of departure for work (%)


40 Diagram 24. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 25. Distribution of respondents by type of current employment (%) average duration of a break in employment (%)

Diagram 26. Distribution of respondents by type Diagram 26.2. Distribution of respondents by of current employment (%) type of current employment (%)

Diagram 27. Distribution of respondents by area of employment (%)


41 Diagram 27.2. Distribution of male respondents by area of employment (%)

Diagram 27.3. Distribution of female respondents by area of employment (%)


42 Diagram 28. Distribution of respondents by strategy of job search (%)

Diagram 28.2. Distribution of respondents by strategy of job search with a breakdown by sex and source country (%)


43 Diagram 29. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 29.2. Distribution of respondents by presence of a written contract with employer (%) presence of a written contract with employer (%)

Diagram 30. Distribution of respondents by reason Diagram 30.2. Distribution of respondents by for a lack of contract with the employer (%) reason for a lack of contract with the employer (%)

Diagram 31. Distribution of respondents by type Diagram 31.2. Distribution of respondents by type of coworkers (local residents or migrants) (%) of coworkers (local residents or migrants) (%)


44 Diagram 32. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 32.2. Distribution of respondents by opinion on desire of local residents to have opinion on desire of local residents to have respondents' jobs (%) respondents' jobs (%)

Diagram 33. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 33.2. Distribution of respondents by location of their passports (%) location of their passports (%)

Diagram 34. Distribution of respondents by their Diagram 35. Distribution of respondents by their income (RUB) job satisfaction in Russia (%)


45 Diagram 35.2. Distribution of respondents by their job Diagram 36. Distribution of respondents by satisfaction in Russia (%) reasons for lack of job satisfaction (respondents could choose two answers) (%)

Diagram 36.2. Distribution of respondents by reasons for lack of job satisfaction (respondents could choose two answers) (%)

Diagram 37. Distribution of respondents by form of Diagram 37.2. Distribution of respondents actual receipt of remuneration (%) by form of actual receipt of remuneration (%)


46 Diagram 38. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 39. Distribution of respondents by average number of hours worked per working average number of days worked per week (days) day (hours)

Diagram 40. Distribution of respondents by their ability to easily quit (%)

Diagram 40.2. Distribution of respondents by their ability to easily quit (%)


47 Diagram 41. Distribution of respondents by presence of documents (%)

Diagram 42. A pamphlet for migrant workers at MMC in the village of Sakharovo ensuring the issuance of patents for all migrant workers in Moscow. Overleaf


48 Diagram 43. A pamphlet for migrant workers at MMC in the village of Sakharovo ensuring the issuance of patents for all migrant workers in Moscow. Inside

Diagram 44. Advertisement of employment at MMC in the village of Sakharovo (author’s photo)

Diagram 45. Self-service payment terminal at MMC in the village of Sakharovo (author’s photo)


49 Diagram 46. One of the buildings of MMC in the village of Sakharovo (author’s photo)

Diagram 47. Distribution of respondents by presence of documents (%)

Diagram 47.2. Distribution of migrants by presence of documents (%)


50 Diagram 48. Distribution of Kyrgyz migrants by the question of convenience of employment without patents (%)

Diagram 48.2. Distribution of Kyrgyz migrants by the question of convenience of employment without patents (%)


51 5. Health of migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan The overwhelming majority of respondents – four fifths – assess their health as good (82%), 18% as satisfactory, and less than 1% as poor (Tables 44, 44.2, Diagram 49). Overall, Kyrgyz migrants assess their health better than their Tajik counterparts: 84% of Kyrgyz migrants find it good, while only 80% of their Tajik counterparts feel likewise. Due to the fact that Kyrgyz migrants do not have to get an employment patent, they are no longer subject to mandatory medical checkup, including fluorography (chest X-ray) and HIV test. Whereas Tajik migrants undergo a medical examination during their last year of stay in Russia, Kyrgyz migrants are exempted from this requirement. This is a major drawback in the alleviations granted to Kyrgyz migrants. In reality, we will face a growth in the incidence of diseases. This is due to the fact that while previously migrants had to undergo medical examination when filing for an employment patent, they no longer have to do so. We don’t have many Armenian migrant workers, but since there are a lot of Kyrgyz ones, this is a bad situation, really. Especially, given the fact that they tend to take human-contact jobs: cleaning services, drivers. The fact that Kyrgyz migrants do not have to undergo a medical examination is a major negative for Russia. This is bad for migrants themselves as they are unaware of the state of their health while they live in packed environments. If one of them contracts TB, he/she may communicate it to all the rest. They don’t get checked and that’s bad. Again, they think I will earn money and go home and get treated. That’s the mindset – it is easier to get treated back at homeland, so I will go for treatment there. Here nobody will treat me, and I will simply buy medications here if I feel really bad. That’s how they take their “pains” till the end and this is why this situation is so dangerous. From expert interviews. 60% of Tajik migrants and 49% of Kyrgyz migrants took their most recent fluorography this year (Tables 45.1, 45.1.2, Diagrams 50.1, 50.1.2). 30% of Tajik migrants and 37% of Kyrgyz migrants took their most recent fluorography last year. 9% of Tajik migrants and 14% of Kyrgyz migrants took their most recent fluorography more than a year ago. It is evident that health awareness is decreasing among the Kyrgyz migrants. Here, 51% of Kyrgyz migrants and 63% of Tajik migrants took their most recent HIV test this year. 34% of Kyrgyz migrants and 29% of Tajik migrants took their most recent HIV test last year. 13% of Kyrgyz migrants and 7% of Tajik migrants took their most recent HIV test more than a year ago (Tables 45.2, 45.2.2, Diagrams 50.2, 50.2.2). In order to get an employment patent, migrant workers from non-EEU countries have to get a medical insurance, however, in order to save money, they get medical insurances with a minimum range of services, which basically prevents using such medical insurances for purposes of treatment of diseases, let along chronic diseases. The system of employment patent-based medical insurances has little effect. We understand that few people use them. They use them in a limited manner, tending to buy the most inexpensive types of medical insurances. This is not a well-tuned system. For Kyrgyz migrants, on the one hand, this theoretically is supposed to be done via their employers. On the other hand, it is not clear how the state can get employers to pay for their employees’ medical insurances. See, in the majority of cases, employment contracts are never made between the employer and the employee. Here, it’s all about legalizing the foreign labor force. When their salaries are shown in the official accounting, employers will have to make contributions to the state budget, and then we will be able to connect this system to the state insurance system. It looks like this issue will have to be resolved via the legalization of migrants’ stay and employment. This is not only migrants’ problem, but also that of Russian workers. It is our common problem. Migrants face many more risks because this system is not working. I am yet to see how this problem can be resolved in another way. The mechanism of employment patents formally resolved this problem, but not fully. From expert interviews.


52 Diagram 49. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 50. Distribution of respondents by the self-assessment of their health (%) time of last photofluorography (chest X-ray) (%)

Diagram 50.1.2. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 50.2. Distribution of respondents by the the time of last photofluorography (chest X- time of last HIV test (%) ray) (%)

Diagram 50.2.2. Distribution of respondents by the time of last photofluorography (chest X-ray) (%)


53 6. Integration of migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan Every fifth respondent wishes to stay in Russia for good (21%); 27% wish to live in Russia for a while (several years) and earn money and; 37% wish to come to Russia to earn money and return home. (Tables 47, 47.2, Diagrams 52, 52.2). One should note that the number of people who wish to live in Russia for a while or come to Russia but not secure Russian citizenship or a permanent resident permit totals 31% of respondents. There are more Kyrgyz citizens (37%) who think this way compared to Tajik migrants (24%). 43% claim that they wish to have Russian citizenship although they don’t seem to make any concrete efforts to achieve that; 2% already filed paperwork, and 14% intend to do so. One should note that Tajik women are the most active in attempting to secure Russian citizenship: 22% of women intend to file paperwork for Russian citizenship, while only 14% of men do the same (Tables 48, 48.2, Diagrams 53, 53.2). The study shows that the motivation behind respondents’ wish to secure Russian citizenship are mostly not related to their desire to live Russia permanently, or their wish to leave their homeland for Russia. Only 25% claimed that in their wish to secure Russian citizenship they were motivated by their desire to move to Russia permanently; while 64% said that Russian citizenship was only an opportunity to find a job more easily, including medical services, protection from police, with their overall intent not being moving to Russia permanently (Tables 49, 49.2, Diagrams 54, 54.2). I want to keep working in the same manner if I can. I wish to file paperwork for citizenship so as to stay here legally. We are already here legally but I want them to stop torturing us with all the inspections and I want to cease to incur expenses associated with paperwork … We are tired of that. 28 years old, Tajik man (of Pamiri ethnicity), Moscow Those who are seeking options for securing Russian citizenship find this as a central argument, there is no “I am a patriot of Russia.” Russian citizenship only makes their lives easier, makes it easier for them to get a mortgage. This process is visible in our town. We have Tajik migrants and Kyrgyz migrants – they are active consumers in the housing market. However, for them to be eligible for mortgages they need to have all their paperwork right. This trend in the housing market is evident and one should understand that it is people who came to Russia about 8 - 10 years ago who are buying apartments, or those who already secured Russian citizenship or those who are about to do so. They are getting mortgages. There are cases where several families are buying one collective apartment. This is a rather interesting phenomenon. We understand that they are buying inexpensive apartments. Those are normally substandard apartments but given that we are talking about a mortgage here, banks usually monitor the situation to make sure that those apartments stay decent and do not crumble in the near future. Being a Russian citizen is beneficial for the very migrant. Even if you are not a Russian citizen, you have to have a permanent resident permit. There are high-responsibility jobs that demand that the employee be “dependent on and watched by” the employer or the state. But those jobs have established processes. However, mass-employment jobs do not require that. From expert interviews Pursuant to respondents, local residents generally treat them well. 52% of respondents noted good treatment, neutral – 37%, hostile – only 3%. It is noteworthy that the worst treatment is observed by migrants in Moscow: 43% are treated well and 50% find local treatment neutral. In Saint Petersburg, those finding their treatment good account for 60%, neutral - 19%; in Yekaterinburg, those finding their treatment good account for 63%, neutral - 30%. The highest degree of hostility is observed by migrants in Saint Petersburg – 8% (Tables 50, 50.2, Diagrams 55, 55.2).


54 Those migrants that at least speak some Russia and can explain what they want to say feel confident. They are treated in a more or less friendly manner. OF course, there are always bigoted individuals who believe they are the best people on earth. The majority, though, are normal people. In Moscow, where the concentration of migrants is the highest, there is no outward unfriendliness toward migrants. This even stopped to be present in the media. Tajik and Kyrgyz migrants tend to work in different industries, however, when it comes to the labor market overall, Tajik migrants tend to hold inferior positions compared to their Kyrgyz counterparts due to their weaker command of Russian. Therefore, it is more difficult for Tajiks to adapt to life in Russia. From expert interviews. A lengthy absence of state-supported adaptation and integration programs, lack of funds for such programs and public initiatives, unfortunately, yield negative results. Migrants tend to insulate and build their lives in parallel ―invisible‖ communities reproducing practices in Russia that reflect their accustomed practices back at homeland – their source countries. This only triggers more mistrust and even spite among the local Russian public, intensifies fears, feeds the stereotypic thinking among the local community, and further distances Russians from migrant workers. Speaking of Tajiks, I saw their labor market. I normally never go there. When I visited that place, I got scared. It’s a town within a town. With its own rules. A woman accompanied me. Она так одета, что сразу видно, что она таджичка. When people saw me with her, they started staring at me: I felt like I was strolling the market, the Taganskiy Ryad. It felt creepy, as if I was not in Russia. It is not Russian laws that work here. I understood that these people lived by their own rules. I should say that a year ago I went to that place frequently and it never felt that way. They live by their own rules and pray several times a day. People feel much more confident there. They feel each other’s support. In that district they don’t feel like they are guests – it’s actually the other way around. I felt like I was a guest. Before, prices were lower in that market. I didn’t go to that market for a while, previously, it had a lot of Russian customers. This time, though, there were no Russian customers there, despite the fact that this district is populated by Russians. I was quite surprised. Customers are of their ethnicity or of other ethnicities. A Kyrgyz girl, the seller, told me: “Myself don’t like visiting this place because men tend to grab my hands if I am not accompanied by my man.” In places where Tajiks compactly live, things escalate even to this. From expert interviews. The study showed that for purposes of problem resolution, help is mostly received by Central Asian migrants from their country fellows (66%) or relatives (60%). Assistance from the state in problem resolution was received by 19% of respondents; from Russian acquaintances - 18%; from diaspora - 15%; from firms - 3% (Tables 51, 51.2, Diagrams 56, 56.2). Kyrgyz migrants, unlike Tajik migrants, tend to utilize help from their embassy and firms more frequently compared to their Tajik counterparts, and tend to take advantage of assistance from their country fellows and relatives less frequently. There are three or four multi-story buildings, they were built over the past five to six years. Different people live there, lots of migrants. One can easily see that it is not that case where they wish to integrate and adopt Russian cultural codes. No. They wear hijabs, their national clothing, only speak their language. To them, it’s normal. They don’t speak Russian, especially their women. It’s all normal to them. They buy homes in different areas [apartments – D.P.], and it is clear that price is everything. I can’t say there are hints of territorial ethnicity-based segregation. Not yet. Of course, there are certain specific cases. For instance, the Lyotchikovo district. That district is densely populated by migrants, there are a lot of them, although the official statistics says there are not that many of them. Same goes for the old sorting base, it looks like they captured it, as if they captured entire Russia. Such a drama. People say this district has to be burned. I don’t agree that in a European sense this district would constitute an Arab Quarter. That’s not the case, our town only has


55 one or two mosques and they are searched by police three times a day. We don’t have that in our town. I can’t say we have enclaves like that. From expert interviews. It is noteworthy that the study revealed a specific attitude of the Kyrgyz Embassy in Yekaterinburg toward Russian researchers that can, indirectly, reflect their entire approach to working in Russia. Our Kyrgyz Embassy is hostile toward us as researchers. They refuse to cooperate. This has been ongoing since 2007, since it had been opened. We thought now it would be easier for us to arrange studies and researches. It was then that they formulated an interesting defense to the effect that we wish to show them in a bad light. As if they don’t speak Russian well and fail to understand what they are asked. And then you interpret it in such a manner as if you are trying to badmouth all Kyrgyz people. It looks like Putin personally has to write a letter that we are conducting a study. They have these mannerisms, this bureaucracy. This is not an isolated example, it’s about the stance they had taken since long time ago: do not engage in outside unauthorized contacts. Such things as sociological surveys – they fail to understand their meaning. They fail to understand their values, why we need them. It is easier to leave them alone, otherwise, who knows what can happen. They have been given such an instruction. From expert interviews. With time, migrants started to spend their free time in a more diversified manner. While previous studies showed that they preferred to socialize with their friends and acquaintances, lately they seem to be much more integrated into local communities, as the range of opportunities offered by large cities for purposes of spending one’s free time grew. Here, 12% of respondents got o museums and expos; movies, theater, concerts - 19%; cafes and restaurants - 8%; gym - 21%; walk around the town - 39%. At the same time, migrants keep feeling close to their diaspora and their country fellows: 68% of respondents noted that they spend their free time in the company of their friends and acquaintances. Those watching TV in their free time account for - 55%, reading - 32% (Tables 52, 52.2, Diagrams 57, 57.2, 57.3). As it has already been noted, the circle of migrants’ socialization in Russia is rather narrow. They mostly socialize with country fellows (73%) or relatives (56%), as well as with coworkers who are fellow migrants (45%). Those socializing with coworkers who are local residents account for 26% of respondents; with neighbors - 17%; with local residents - 11% (Tables 53, 53, Diagrams 58, 58.2, 58.3). Those talking with their close ones by phone, Skype or other VoIP daily account for 20% of respondents; several times a week - 40%; several times a month - 28%; once a month or less frequently - 9%. Only 2% almost never talk to their close ones. Women tend to talk to their close ones more often than men (Tables 54, 54, Diagrams 59, 59.2, 59.3). Only 23% of respondents are fully satisfied with their lives in Russia. Those who are overall satisfied but have problems account for 43%; those who generally satisfied but still have problems - 28%. 6% of respondents find it difficult to live in Russia; and less than 1% are totally dissatisfied with life in Russia. Kyrgyz migrants tend to be more satisfied with their lives in Russia compared to their Tajik counterparts (Tables 55, 55.2, Diagrams 60, 60.2).


56 Diagram 51. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 52. Distribution of respondents by average time of stay in Russia, exclusive of short future plans to stay in Russia (%) departures (%)

Diagram 52.2. Distribution of respondents by future plans to stay in Russia (%)

Diagram 53. Distribution of respondents by wish Diagram 53.2. Distribution of respondents by to secure Russian citizenship or a permanent wish to secure Russian citizenship or a residence permit (%) permanent residence permit (%)


57 Diagram 54. Distribution of respondents by Diagram 54.2. Distribution of respondents by motivation to secure Russian citizenship (%) motivation to secure Russian citizenship (%)

Diagram 55. Distribution of respondents by local Diagram 55.2 Distribution of respondents by residents' treatment of them (%) local residents' treatment of them (%)

Diagram 56. Distribution of respondents by help in problem resolution (%)


58 Diagram 56.2. Distribution of respondents by help in problem resolution (%)

Diagram 57. Distribution of respondents by what they do in their free time (%)

Diagram 57.2. Distribution of respondents by what they do in their free time (%)


59 Diagram 57.3. Distribution of respondents by what they do in their free time (%)

Diagram 58. Distribution of respondents by circle of socialization in Russia (%)


60 Diagram 58.2. Distribution of respondents by circle of socialization in Russia (%)

Diagram 58.3. Distribution of respondents by circle of socialization in Russia (%)


61 Diagram 59. Distribution of respondents by frequency of communication with their close ones by phone (Skype, other types of VoIP) (%)

Diagram 59.2. Distribution of respondents by frequency of communication with their close ones by phone (Skype, other types of VoIP) (%)


62 Diagram 59.3. Distribution of respondents by frequency of communication with their close ones by phone (Skype, other types of VoIP) (%)

Diagram 60. Distribution of respondents by satisfaction with life in Russia (%)


63 Diagram 60.2. Distribution of respondents by satisfaction with life in Russia (%)


64 Conclusions The situation that emerged with respect to foreign workers in the Russian labor market was brought about by its need for low-skilled labor. At the same time, the acute dearth of mediumqualification specialists creates opportunities for Central Asian workers in their search for betterpaying jobs using the skills and competencies they possess without having to engage in a bitter competition with local Russian workers. This enables migrant workers from Central Asia to shape more long-term life strategies and build their professional careers. Migrant workers’ improving their qualification on the job and poor use of the capacity, education and skills they possess are caused by a wide range of factors and reasons. Overcoming the existing barriers is possible by changing approaches to the education sector in the course of the training of specialists and under a condition of a better involvement of employers (both in migrant workers’ source countries and in Russia – the host country). A major differentiation of sectors of migrant workers’ employment became a significant factor: whereas 15-20 years ago, the were mostly employed in trade and construction, these days, areas of migrants’ employment include housekeeping, services (public catering, hotels, etc.), industry, transportation and communications, education, etc. The skills and qualification required to secure employment in Russia are normally obtained by migrants in the course of their work. Education obtained back at their homelands is difficult to apply amidst new conditions of life and work in Russia. The experience in working in the Russian labor market prompts migrants to rely more on the skills and qualification newly gained in Russia rather than the skills obtained during studies back at their homelands. The first places of employment of Central Asian migrant workers in Russia usually does not correspond to their education: this was stated by 65% of respondents. Only every fifth responding migrant was able to utilize the education he/she received at his/her first place of employment in Russia, while 14% of respondents were able to partially take advantage of their education. Irrational use of the existing potential of migrants is triggered by a set of factors: differences in education standards between Russia and the rest of CIS, distrust by Russian employers of the quality of education in CIS countries, migrants’ choosing less skill-requiring but more widely available jobs. The Russian labor market experiences a deficit of both low-skilled and medium-skilled labor, which is why migrant workers are able to secure employment consistent with their education and qualification; however, unfortunately, such a choice is currently only available to Kyrgyz citizens whose education diplomas are now recognized in Russia as part of the wider Eurasian Economic Union. The main opportunity for migrants’ improving their qualification is on-the-job training. About a third (31%) of migrant workers claimed they underwent professional training in Russia by way of learning while doing their jobs. Frequently, migrant workers find it difficult to reconcile their trips to Russia and the skills and qualification they gain in Russia with their subsequent lives and careers back home. Short-term projects nurtured during their work in Russia become life strategies in their own right, clouding the desired early future. Here, a pre-departure informational orientation and professional induction, especially in the case of younger migrant workers, become very important and can demonstrate to today’s and tomorrow’s migrants that they can be builders of their own future, and that traveling to work in Russia can be incorporated into their medium-term and long-term life, and that they can improve their qualification for future work and plan their lives as a long-term project. Amidst the settings where migration to Russia mostly originated from rural areas of Central Asia, where the local populace finds it difficult to become instantly familiar and comfortable with the dynamic and prospects of urban life they had never seen before, such a preparatory work would be particularly useful. An important factor in the efficiency of use by migrants of their capacity in Russia is the recognition of their education diplomas and certificates that they had obtained prior to departure and that prove their skills and qualification. As part of the Eurasian Economic Union, such experience is being built as regulations for the mutual recognition of diplomas by EEU Member States begin to be enforced. However, when it comes to other CIS countries, including some Central Asian nations that act as donors of labor for Russia, this issue is yet to be worked out. Overall, as the study shows, the


65 preparation for the departure for Russia is mostly limited to the inclusion of labor migrants into their country fellows’ social networks and does not cover training/preparation or retraining or otherwise improving their qualification to work in Russia. Nevertheless, more than a half of respondents believe that it is advisable to secure a better level of education in Russia, although such a wish, normally, only remains hypothetical. Central Asian migrants’ receiving education in Russia is already underway, however, the scale of this phenomenon is still rather modest. Their choice of major depends heavily on the tuition and is only then dictated by its popularity in the labor market. Migrants wish to engage in less hard jobs that have upside for career growth and gradual salary increases if not for themselves then at least for their children in whose education their willing to invest their earnings. The study demonstrated that despite the fact that Russian secondary and vocational education institutions are not yet ready to mass-enroll foreigners, graduating from them has already become attractive for younger migrants as it opens opportunities for integration, better employment and even naturalization. One can single out the following problems that have to be resolved in order to attract foreigners to Russian secondary and vocational education institutions: - Understaffing that is manifested in a lack of specialists that can take the quality of instruction in Russian secondary and vocational education institutions to a competitive level on the scale of the international education market. - A need for the reequipping of Russian secondary and vocational education institutions, preparation of them for the training of students to modern global standards which will require some major financial investments. - Internships will have to be regulated systemically and will need be enforced accordingly. - Difficulties with a guaranteed reimbursement of funds spent on the training of foreigners in Russian secondary and vocational education institutions by either employers or the state (both Russian and those from countries of origin of migrant workers). The last point needs to be specially explained. In the case of free education at the expense of Russian employers, a question arises as to the legalization of retention of the already trained employee at a workplace that will be offered to him/her by the employer that spent money on his/her training. In the case of free education at the expense of the Russian state, one can see the very same problem of the expending of funds that does not guarantee the employment of specialists trained under free-of-charge state programs in Russian companies. Trained foreigners may easily choose to return to their homelands or leave to take jobs in other countries. Despite the fact that Russia continues to experience acute shortages of medium-skilled workforce, one can observe a certain standoff between the state and large companies that, while recognizing the existing shortages of workforce, are not willing to invest in the training of such workforce. Another possibility is a compromise option for the payment of tuition for prospective labor migrants by several parties. As part of international treaties between Russia and Central Asian nations, one could consolidate the funds of the source country, Russia and the student’s family. A security to be pledged could the student’s family’s property (an apartment, a land plot), as successfully practiced by the ―Bolashak‖ State Education Program in Kazakhstan. However, in order to properly enforce such a practice, one will need to undertake a major preparatory work. As to the possible training, retraining or certification of migrant workers in compliance with Russian standards on the basis of short-term courses back at migrants’ homelands, so that they arrive to Russia holding the required certificates, this process is yet to be properly established. Such a certification can be in demand on part of large Russian employers; however, small and medium businesses will be reluctant to get involved in such a scheme. Unlike higher education institutions, with some of them having already reoriented themselves to enroll foreigners, Russian secondary and vocational education institutions do not envision dealing with foreign students as part of their medium-term and long-term development. The study demonstrated a need for a state support of the education for migration in Russian secondary and vocational education institutions. The arrangement of communication and advertising in labor donor countries and the arrangement of job expos and fairs of the Russian education in such countries is an


66 activity that will be much more effective under a systemic programmatic approach and involvement on part of Russian line state ministries and agencies as partners of the Russian secondary and vocational education institutions. In the short run, one has to take into consideration two trends with differing vectors that determine migration flows in Russia and seriously impact its labor market. On the one hand, one can observe a long-term demographic crisis that attracts foreign workers to Russia; on the other hand, the migration is influenced by the economic crisis that pushes migrant workers from Russia. At the same time, the current economic crisis is a temporary phenomenon while the demographic crisis is a longterm bothering trend. Therefore, one can positively project that a reduction in the number of ablebodied working-age Russian nationals will continue to attract foreign workers: the Russian labor market is becoming emptier and more working bodies are needed. It is for this reason that migrant workers arrive to Russia from Central Asian countries with which Russia maintains a no-visa relationship. Using professional skills by migrant workers depends heavily on the Russian-built system of use of professional skills of Russian workers that are too used with a limited efficiency. There are no established mechanisms for labor exchanges (databases and platforms), there is insufficient information and monitoring of the occupations needed in Russia, and there are insufficient projections of the future of the Russian labor market with no standardized conditions of work with respect to various qualifications in CIS countries. A positive example of dealing with foreign workers is a Multifunctional Migration Center (MCC) in the village of Sakharovo that between 2015 and 2016 achieved some major progress and by 2016 was able to create a special structure for the employment of migrant workers. Central Asian migrants are most vulnerable in the labor market and undoubtedly have the lowest chance of fully utilizing their skills and qualification compared to local residents. Any change in this situation with regard to a need for a better and fuller use of migrants’ professional skills is associated with changes in the system for management of migration and economic processes in Russia. Prospects of projects associated with retraining of prospective migrant workers back in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan will be severely limited by the ever-decreasing quality of education in these countries’ secondary schools and a poor command by their young generation of the Russian language which is acutely needed for securing better jobs in Russia. This is a major restricting factor for both the education of youths back in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, unless Russia establishes its own training and retraining programs, and for the training of Kyrgyz and Tajik youths in Russia. However, if Russia creates special programs to train or retrain specialists in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, such programs can actually be implemented in those countries as their leadership recognizes the need for professional preparation and training of their migrants. Concurrently with such professional training programs, Russian language training programs will be rationally implemented. Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are currently experiencing major problems with investments in the material and technical foundation of their education systems, including the computerization, development of training materials and supplements, training of trainers and equipping of classrooms. It is evident that Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan on their own are barely able to launch wide-scale education programs, and Russia, despite the lack of qualified workforce and official documents confirming the need for migration (e.g. Migration Policy Concept till 2025) is in no rush to develop a wide cooperation in education and enroll foreign students in its secondary and vocational education institutions. The objective of improving the efficiency of using the capacity of migrant workers is complicated by a large shadow economy in the employment in Russia which is difficult to measure and which provides jobs for both migrants and domestic workers. Moreover, the events of 2015-2016 demonstrated that the situation in the Russian exports-oriented economy, that is based on raw materials and commodities, can change very quickly. All of this makes projecting occupations that will be most popular in the Russian labor market in the medium and long terms all the more difficult. Using the capacity and qualification of Central Asian migrants that hold creative occupations is a rather difficult task today: their employment is complicated by low salaries offered to such


67 workers even for Russian workers since the majority of such people are employed in the public sector. Legal schemes for employment and official intermediaries are still rather weakly represented in the Russian labor market due to lack of attention by the Russian Federation to the formation of official employment services. The market for migrant employment services in Russia is even less developed compared to that for domestic workers. The study demonstrated that for purposes of gaining employment migrants mostly use social networks, newspaper ads, and Internet and very rarely take advantage of Russian employment services. At the same time, migrants that expect higher salaries and a higher job status tend to approach private employment agencies and consider alternatives to migrants’ social networks. The study showed that Kyrgyz migrants tend to use migrants’ social networks less and less as sectors of their employment are becoming more diverse and the supply present in social networks are simply no longer able to satisfy their differentiated demand including the demand for jobs requiring better qualification. An important gap to fill in dealing with migrants and the more efficient use of their capacity is the lack of the National Migrant Labor Exchange (a uniform database and platform for the supply and demand of labor). An indirect evidence of that is the emergence in the Multifunctional Migrant Center in the village of Sakharovo of a special employment service under auspices of the Government of Moscow. Unfortunately, Kyrgyz migrants almost fully miss the benefits of this service as they fail to secure employment patents in Russia. *

* * In conclusion, one must add that it is advisable that changes in the Russian migration policy be coordinated with changes in its economic policy, employment policy, labor market policy, and social and foreign policies. Labor migration can act as a tool of economic and political integration of Russia being host to migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.


68 +BIBLIOGRAPHY Ajwad, Mohamed Ihsan and others (2014a) The Skills Road: Skills for Employability in the Kyrgyz Republic. World Bank, Washington, DC. Ajwad, Mohamed Ihsan and others (2014b). The Skills Road: Skills for Employability in Tajikistan. World Bank, Washington, DC. Arias, Omar S (2014). Back to Work: Growing with Jobs in Europe and Central Asia. Washington, DC: World Bank. Baumann, Arne, et al. and others (2013). Transition from School to Work in Kyrgyzstan: Results of the 2011/12 Transition Survey. European Training Foundation (ETF), Torino, Italy. Chudinovskih Olga (2012). Migration and bilateral agreements in the Commonwealth of Independent States. In OECD, Free Movement of Workers and Labor Market Adjustment: Recent Experiences from OECD Countries and the European Union, 251–76. Paris: OECD Publishing. Data of Surveys of Tajikistan (2009). Living Standards. European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (2010). The Skill Matching Challenge: Analyzing Skill Mismatch and Policy Implications. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Gender Statistics (2015) Uzbekistan Accessed 06 February 2015 http://gender.stat.uz/en/index.php. Gill, Indermit S. and others (2014). Diversified Development: Making the Most of Natural Resources in Eurasia. World Bank. Washington, DC. Hanushek, Eric A., and Ludger Woessmann (2008). The Role of Cognitive Skills in Economic Development. Journal of Economic Literature 46 (3): 607–68. Heckman, James J. and others (1998). Explaining Rising Wage Inequality: Explorations with a Dynamic General Equilibrium Model of Labor Earnings with Heterogeneous Agents. Review of Economic Dynamics 1: 1–58. Helemäe, Jelena, and Ellu Saar (2000). Linkages between the Education System and Labor Market: Estonia against the Backdrop of EU Countries. In Estonian Human Development Report, 85–99. Tallinn: TPU RASI. International Labor Organization (ILO) (2010). Kyrgyzstan Country Program on Decent Work for 2010–2014. Geneva: ILO. International Labor Organization (ILO). 1999. Employment and Labor Market Policies in Transition Economies. Geneva: International Labor Office. Labor Market and Professional Education (2007). What is the Cooperation Mechanism? Information Bulletin Education Economy Monitoring. No. 8 (31) World Bank. Available from http://www.hse.ru/data/2011/05/19/1213863051/infbul31.pdf OECD (2013). OECD Family Database, OECD, Paris. Accessed 06 February 16, 2015 www.oecd.org/social/family/database. Population Reference Bureau (2012). World Population Data Sheet. Robert, Peter (2003). Self-Selection and Selection: Transition from Secondary to Tertiary Education in Hungary. Czech Sociological Review 39 (3): 325–49. The Unemployment Rate in Kyrgyzstan Was 8.5% (2013). Available from http://kant.kg/2013-01-18/uroven-bezrabotitsyi-kyirgyizstane/. Weekly report submitted by Russian Federation executive authorities on the situation at the labor market (2015). Available from http://trudvsem.ru/Charts/BRONE/Activity3.aspx. World Bank (2013a). Creating Valuable Skills: A New Framework for Migration as Development. Washington, DC: World Bank. World Bank (2013b). Jobs, Mobility, and Gender in the Kyrgyz Republic. World Bank, Washington, DC. World Bank (2013c). Kyrgyz Republic: Poverty Update, 2011. Report No. 78213-KG, World Bank, Washington, DC. World Bank (2013e). Annual remittances data inflows and bilateral database, October. World Bank, Washington, DC. World Bank. (2013d) Tajikistan Jobs, Skills, and Migration Survey. World Bank/GIZ.


69 Arefyev, A.L., Sheregi F.E. Exports of Russian Education Services: A Statistical Compilation. Issue 6 / Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. — M.: Sociocenter, 2016. Labor Migrant Exchange (2011). Available from http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2011/0481/inet01.php. Bolshakova M. (2001). Not Enough of Your Own?! The Uralmash Plant to Hire Foreign Workers. Gazeta. 04.04. Available from http://www.vedomosti.ru/newspaper/article/2001/04/04/27166. Bondarenko N.V. and M.D. Krasilnikova (2014). Labor Market and Professional Education – What Is the Mechanism for Cooperation? ―Monitoring of Economics of Education‖ Information Newsletter, issue #8 (31). Available from http://www.hse.ru/data/2014/06/24/1310217428/ИБ%20МЭО%20№1%20(75)%202014%20(2).pdf Varshavskaya E.Ya. (2012). A Foreign Worker in the Russian Labor Market (Employer’s Perspective). Labor Migration: Trends, Policies, Statistics. Reading Materials in Memory of E.V. Tyuryukanova 12 July 2012. Ed. O.S. Chudinovskikh, E.V. Donets. Compilation of Materials. M.: MAKS Press Varshavskaya E.Ya., Denisenko M.B. (2014). Mobility of Foreign Workers in the Russian Labor Market. Sociological Study #4, p. 63-73. Available from http://demoscope.ru/weekly/2014/0605/analit02.php Vishnevskiy A., et al. (2013). Population of Russia 2010-2011. 18th and 19th Annual Demographic Report. Moscow: Higher School of Economics. Vishnevskiy A., et al. (2014). Population of Russia 2012. 20th Annual Demographic Report. Moscow: Higher School of Economics Head of the Ministry of Finance Estimated the Russian Informal Sector at 15-20% of GDP (2013). RBK 20.06. Available from http://top.rbc.ru/economics/20/06/2013/862716.shtml. Gritsyuk M. (2015). Standard Answer. Head of the Ministry of Labor Maksim Topilin Disclosed to "RG" the Plan of Protection of Russians from Unemployment. RG "Rossiyskaya Gazeta" – Federal issue #6584 (13) Available from http://www.rg.ru/2015/01/26/mintrud.html. Gurova T. and Ivanter A. (2012). We Produce Nothing. Expert. No 47. 26 November - 2 December, p. 19-26. Tajikistan Living Standards Measurement Survey (2009). LSMS. S.A. Druzhilov (2012). Cutting Down the Number of Universities in Russia: Social Effects to Be Expected. International Journal of Applied and Fundamental Research No 8, p. 28-31. Available from http://www.rae.ru/meo/pdf/2012/8/2012_08_6.pdf. Eurasian Development Bank (2013). Report #14. Zayonchkovskaya Zh., et al. (2014a). Household Workers in Russia and Kazakhstan. Almaty: UN Women, Ex. Libris. Zayonchkovskaya Zh., et al. (2014b). Protection of Rights of Muscovites amidst Mass Migration. Annex to Report on Activities of Ombudsman in Moscow, on Compliance with, and Protection of, Rights of Humans and Citizens in 2013. Moscow: Center for Migration Research. Zayonchkovskaya Zh., et al. (2014). Household Workers in Russia and Kazakhstan. Almaty: UN Women Zaripov Muzaffar (2011) For a Trip to Be Successful – Magazine ―Migration in the 21st Century‖, #6(9) November – December. Corruption Perception Index (2014). Corruption in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Available from http://www.transparency.org.ru/component/docman/doc_download/599--2014-----------pdf. Foreign Labor Force in the Russian Labor Market (2012). Demoscope-weekly №535-536 10-31 December. Available from http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2012/0535/analit06.php. CIS website (2015). Accessed 06 February 2015 http://e-cis.info/page.php?id=19611. Concept of Migration Policy of the Russian Federation till 2025 (2013) Available from http://www.fms.gov.ru/documentation/koncep_mig_pol/. Kyrgyzstan – One of the World Leaders in the Share of Remittances in GDP (2013). Available from http://demoscope.ru/weekly/2013/0537/panorm01.php.


70 Levedev S. (2008). Supergastarbeiters – ―Trud‖ Newspaper. 26 May. Available from http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2008/0335/gazeta05.php. Privileges for Crimea Residents in the course of Entering Russian Universities Are Likely to Be Extended (2014). RIA-Novosti16.07. Available from http://ria.ru/crimea_today/20140716/1016163817.html. Madeyuyev A. (2013). Migration Policy of the Kyrgyz Republic: State and Prospects. Presentation held on 14 March 2013 at a videoconference of MIRPAL. Manuilova A. (2013). In the Shadow at A Working Noon. Rosstat Notes a Growth in Employment in the Shadow Economy – ―Kommersant‖ Magazine. 21.10. Available from http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2324688. The Ministry of Social Development of the Russian Federation Developed a Mechanism for an Organized Recruitment of Foreign Labor from CIS Countries (2011). 25 May. Kadrovik.ru. Available from http://www.kadrovik.ru/modules.php?file=article&name=News&op=modload&sid=12477. Molodykh A. (2013). Where Our Arms Are Growing From. ―Russkiy Reporter‖ Newspaper. 22 August, #33 (311). Available from http://www.rusrep.ru/article/2013/08/20/worldskills/. МОМ (2012). Practices in the Use of Employment Patents by Foreign Workers in the Russian federation (study findings). Available from http://moscow.iom.int/russian/publications/Practica_patent.pdf. Morgunova А. (2012). Labor Migrants in Russia: Assessments and Prospects for Interaction. – “Vestnik Obshestvennogo Mneniya‖ Newspaper. #3-4, p. 110-122 Available from http://demoscope.ru/weekly/2013/0555/analit02.php. Mukomel В. (2012). Migrants in the Labor Market: Profiles, Mobility, Illegal and Informal Employment. Labor Migration: Trends, Policies, Statistics. Reading Materials in Memory of E.V. Tyuryukanova 12 July 2012. Ed. Chudinovskikh O.S., Donets E.V. – Compilation of materials. Moscow: MAKS Press. Nikitin A. (2015). Muscovite – Now That Sounds Poor – ―Kommersant-Dengi‖ Magazine #1-2 (1009-1010) 19.01.- 25.01 Review of Migration Developments in Russia in 2014. (2014). 13.01. Fergana.ru. Available from http://www.fergananews.com/articles/8011. Poletaev D.V. (2004) Regional Aspects of Illegal Migration to Russia // Problem of Illegal Migration in Russia: Realities and Search for Solutions (findings of a sociological study) IOM, IOM Bureau in Russia, M.: Gendalf - p. 45-160. Poletaev D.V., Florinskaya Y.F. (2015) Migrants’ TB and HIV Awareness. Working Papers. M. Red Cross. Putin Signed a Law Permitting Replacing Labor Migrant Quotas with Patents. (2014). TASS 25 November. Available from http://news.mail.ru/politics/20251623/. Resolution of Government of the Russian Federation dated 7 February 2011 #163-r (2011). ―On Concept of the Federal Targeted Education Development Program for 2011 - 2015.‖ 24 February. Available from http://www.garant.ru/products/ipo/prime/doc/55070647/. The Ministry of Labor of the Russian Federation (2014) 25.12. Available from http://www.rosmintrud.ru/employment/migration/60/. Russian Economy: A Gradual Slow Movement Forward #36, 9 November 2016. http://www.vsemirnyjbank.org/ru/country/russia/publication/rer Rosstat (2014b). Data Accessed 06 February 16, 2015 http://www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_site/population/demo/progn3.htm. Rosstat (2014c). Data Accessed 06 February 16, 2015 http://www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_site/population/demo/progn7.htm. Rosstat (2014d). Data Accessed 06 February 16, 2015 http://www.gks.ru/wps/wcm/connect/rosstat_main/rosstat/ru/statistics/wages/labour_force/#. Rosstat (2014e). Data accessed on 06 February 16, 2015. Findings of a Sample-Based Statistical Observation of the Use of Migrant Labor (based on findings of a sample-based survey of population in the 3rd quarter of 2014) -Available from http://www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_site/imigr/index.html.


71 Rosstat (2014а). Data accessed 06 February 16, 2015 http://www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_site/population/demo/progn1.htm. The Ministry of Labor of the Russian Federation (2014) December. Available from http://www.rostrud.ru/rostrud/deyatelnost/?ID=244472. Website of the Bolashak State Education Program – Center for International Programs. bolashak.gov.kz Labor Migration from Kyrgyzstan Exceeds the Norm More than Twice (2013). KirTag News Agency, 18 December. Available from http://demoscope.ru/weekly/2013/0537/panorm01.php. Tyuryukanova, E.V., et al. Female Migrants from CIS in Russia. Series: Migration Barometer in the Russian Federation. Moscow: MAKS Press Tyuryukanova E. and Florinskaya Y. (2012). Foreign Labor Force in the Russian Labor Market. Demoscope–weekly #535-536 10-31 December. Available from http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2012/0535/analit06.php. Federal Migration Service (2015). Amendments to legislation. Accessed 06 February 2015 http://www.fms.gov.ru/foreign_national/izmenzakon/. Chudinovskikh O. (2014). State Regulation of Naturalization in the Russian Federation: Policies and Trends. Moscow: Higher School of Economics Press. Shokhin A. (2013). Business Choked by Understaffing – ―Rossiyskaya Gazeta‖ Newspaper. 19.03. Available from http://www.rg.ru/2013/03/19/biznes.html.


72 Annex 1

I. Sociodemographic section Table 4. Distribution of respondents by sex (%) Overall Sex Male 70,4 Female 29,6

Tajikistan 74,5 25,5

Kyrgyzstan 66,3 33,7

Table 5. Distribution of respondents by nationality (%) Overall Males Nationality Tajikistan 50,1 53 Kyrgyzstan 49,9 47

Females 43,2 56,8

Table 6. Distribution of respondents by nationality (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Tajik 40,7 80,7 0,4 Pamiri 5,9 11,8 0,0 Kyrgyz 44,1 0,4 88,0 Uzbek 7,5 5,8 9,2 Tatar 1,1 0,8 1,4 Russian 0,5 0,2 0,8 100,0 100, 0 100,0

Males 44,5 5,2 42,1 6,4 0,9 0,6 100,0

Females 31,4 7,4 48,6 10,1 1,7 0,3 100, 0

Table 7. Distribution of respondents by age (%) Overall Tajikistan 18-25 33 32,5 26-35 32,8 31,5 36-60 34,2 36 100,0 100, 0

Males 33,3 31,5 35,2 100,0

Females 32,1 36,1 31,8 100, 0

Kyrgyzstan 33,5 34,3 32,2 100,0

Table 8. Distribution of respondents by type of residential area in the place of permanent residence with a breakdown by source country (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females In the capital 12,9 12,2 13,5 12,4 13,9 In a large city (more than 23,4 22,8 24,1 23,5 23,4 100 thousand residents) In a small town (less than 41,3 42,2 40,4 40,1 44,1 100 thousand residents), township, district center In a rural area 22,4 22,8 22,0 24,0 18,6 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 8.2. Distribution of respondents by type of residential area in the place of permanent residence with a breakdown by country (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females In the capital 12,9 12,1 12,8 12,5 15,0 In a large 23,4 23,7 23,2 20,3 25,7 city (more than 100 thousand residents)


73 In a small 41,2 town (less than 100 thousand residents), township, district center In a rural 22,4 area 100,0

40,4

39,6

46,9

41,9

23,8

24,4

20,3

17,4

100, 0

100,0

100,0

100, 0

Table 9. Distribution of respondents by education (%) Overall Tajikistan Higher (graduated from an 20,3 22,5 institute, university) Higher, incomplete (entered, 5,6 4,4 but never graduated from, an institute, university) Secondary vocational 31,4 25,7 (graduated from a school, vocational school, college) Secondary (graduated from a 37,1 40,0 school, lyceum) Secondary and below, 5,6 7,4 incomplete (never graduated from a secondary school) 100,0 100, 0 Table 9.2. Distribution of respondents by education (%) Overall Tajikistan Higher (graduated from an 20,3 21,9 institute, university) Higher, incomplete (entered, 5,6 5,1 but never graduated from, an institute, university) Secondary vocational 31,4 25,1 (graduated from a school, vocational school, college) Secondary (graduated from a 37,1 40,4 school, lyceum) Secondary and below, 5,7 7,5 incomplete (never graduated from a secondary school) 100,0 100, 0

Kyrgyzstan 18,0

Males 19,3

Females 22,6

6,8

6,0

4,7

37,1

31,2

31,8

34,1

37,4

36,1

4,0

6,1

4,7

100,0

100,0

100, 0

Kyrgyzstan 16,3

Males 24,2

Females 21,4

6,9

2,3

6,5

38,1

27,3

35,1

34,1

39,1

33,9

4,6

7,1

3,1

100,0

100,0

100, 0

Males 60,0 5,4 31,5 2,7 0,4 100,0

Females 52,7 5,4 25,3 12,2 4,4 100, 0

Table 10. Distribution of respondents by marital status (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Officially married 57,8 58,8 56,9 Unofficially married 5,4 4,4 6,4 Single 29,7 29,9 29,5 Divorced 5,5 4,8 6,2 Widowed 1,6 2,1 1,0 100,0 100, 0 100,0


74 Table 10.2. Distribution of respondents by marital status (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males Officially married 57,8 58,4 61,9 Unofficially married 5,4 3,7 7,3 Single 29,7 34,5 28,1 Divorced 5,5 2,9 2,4 Widowed 1,6 0,5 0,3 100,0 100, 0 100,0

Tajikistan, females 60,1 6,3 16,4 10,2 7,0 100,0

Kyrgyzstan, females 47,0 4,8 32,1 13,7 2,4 100, 0

Table 11. Distribution of respondents by place of stay of husband/wife/partner (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Husband/wife/partner in 55,6 44,6 66,6 44,1 86,5 Russia, together with the respondent Husband/wife/partner 43,8 54,8 32,8 55,4 12,9 stayed back home in place of permanent residence Other 0,6 0,6 0,6 0,7 0,6 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 11.2. Distribution of respondents by place of stay of husband/wife/partner (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Husband/wife/partner in 55,6 27,9 60,1 89,4 83,7 Russia, together with the respondent Husband/wife/partner 43,8 71,2 39,5 10,6 15,1 stayed back home in place of permanent residence Other 0,6 0,9 0,4 0,0 1,2 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 12. Distribution of respondents by financial situation of their families today (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Buy all basic things and 12,9 8,6 17,3 12,7 13,6 make savings Buy all basic things but 27,5 29,0 26,0 27,9 26,4 don't make any savings Income only covers basic 54,4 55,8 52,9 54,1 54,9 needs (food, clothing, etc.) Income fails to cover basic 5,2 6,6 3,8 5,3 5,1 needs (food, clothing, etc.) 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 12.2. Distribution of respondents by financial situation of their families today (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Buy all basic things and 12,9 7,5 18,5 11,7 15,0 make savings Buy all basic things but 27,5 28,0 27,9 32,0 22,2 don't make any savings Income only covers basic 54,4 57,3 50,6 51,6 57,5 needs (food, clothing, etc.)


75 Income fails to cover basic 5,2 needs (food, clothing, etc.) 100,0

7,2

3,0

4,7

5,3

100, 0

100,0

100,0

100, 0

II. Migration to Russia Table 13. Distribution of respondents by work experience back at homeland (in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan) (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Possessed work experience 59,9 58,2 61,5 61,8 55,4 back at homeland Did not possess work 40,1 41,8 38,5 38,2 44,6 experience back at homeland 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 13.2. Distribution of respondents by work experience back at homeland and Kyrgyzstan) (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females Possessed work experience 59,6 60,3 63,4 52,3 back at homeland Did not possess work 40,1 39,7 36,6 47,7 experience back at homeland 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

(in Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan, females 57,7 42,3

100, 0

Table 14. Distribution of respondents by work experience back at homeland (years) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females 9,01 9,24 9,8 7,32 9,13 Table 15. Distribution of respondents by area of employment back at homeland (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Construction 15,6 18,3 13,0 21,5 0 Trade (wholesale and retail) 19,9 20,0 19,8 17,1 27,3 Industry 8,4 9,7 7,1 8,3 8,5 Residential and utilities 1,0 0,3 1,6 1,2 0,6 stock Services (public catering, 13,7 13,4 14,0 12,2 17,6 entertainment, hotels, etc.) Transportation and 14,4 12,8 15,9 19,6 0,6 communications Education 11,7 12,8 10,7 7,4 23,0 Healthcare 5,0 3,8 6,2 1,6 13,9 Other 10,3 8,9 11,7 11,1 8,5 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 15.2. Distribution of respondents by area of employment back at homeland (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Construction 15,6 23,8 19,0 0,0 0,0 Trade (wholesale and retail) 19,9 17,9 16,3 26,9 27,6


76 Industry Residential and utilities stock Services (public catering, entertainment, hotels, etc.) Transportation and communications Education Healthcare Other

8,4 1,0

10,3 0,4

6,2 1,9

7,5 0,0

9,2 1,0

13,7

11,2

13,3

20,9

15,3

14,4

16,1

23,3

1,5

0,0

11,7 5,0 10,4 100,0

9,0 0,4 10,9 100, 0

5,7 2,9 11,4 100,0

25,4 14,9 2,9 100,0

21,4 13,3 12,2 100, 0

Table 16. Distribution of respondents by question of securing a qualification needed for the best employment in Russia (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Construction 17,2 25,1 9,2 24,1 0,7 Trade (wholesale and retail) 13,6 17,1 10,0 11,5 18,6 Industry 1,6 1,4 1,8 1,7 1,4 Residential and utilities 1,5 1,2 1,8 2,0 0,3 stock Services (public catering, 7,8 7,0 8,6 6,3 11,5 entertainment, hotels, etc.) Transportation and 7,9 7,6 8,2 10,9 0,7 communications Education 3,3 3,0 3,6 2,0 6,4 Healthcare 4,5 3,8 5,2 2,4 9,5 Other 1,8 1,2 2,4 2,1 1,0 Not advisable to study back 17,3 15,3 19,3 16,5 19,3 at homeland; Russia only offers low-paying jobs that do not require skills and knowledge Studying back at homeland 2,5 2,8 2,2 2,6 2,4 will not provide skills and knowledge needed in Russia Failed to answer 21,0 14,5 27,7 17,9 28,4 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 16.2. Distribution of respondents by question of securing a qualification needed for the best employment in Russia (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Construction 17,2 33,2 13,9 1,6 0,0 Trade (wholesale and retail) 13,6 14,4 8,2 25,0 13,7 Industry 1,6 1,6 1,8 0,8 1,8 Residential and utilities 1,5 1,3 2,7 0,8 0,0 stock Services (public catering, 7,8 5,1 7,6 12,5 10,7 entertainment, hotels, etc.) Transportation and 7,9 10,2 11,8 0,0 1,2 communications Education 3,3 1,9 2,1 6,3 6,5


77 Healthcare Other Not advisable to study back at homeland; Russia only offers low-paying jobs that do not require skills and knowledge Studying back at homeland will not provide skills and knowledge needed in Russia Failed to answer

4,5 1,8 17,3

1,6 1,6 14,4

3,3 2,7 18,8

10,2 0,0 18,0

8,9 1,8 20,2

2,5

2,4

2,7

3,9

1,2

21,0 100,0

12,3 100, 0

24,4 100,0

20,9 100,0

34 100, 0

Table 17. Distribution of respondents by form of preparation for departure for Russia (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Checked my health, 79,0 80,9 77,2 79,7 77,4 submitted samples for tests, visited doctors Learned Russian on my own 49,9 54,0 45,7 49,8 50,0 Learned Russian at courses 20,7 20,1 21,2 20,7 20,6 Found out whether I am 42,0 42,6 41,3 44,3 36,5 blacklisted to enter Russia on the FMS website or via a firm, etc. Learned from acquaintances 66,6 68,7 64,5 66,4 67,2 about employment opportunities in Russia Secured employment in 33,4 37,8 28,9 35,7 27,7 Russia before departure, in advance Found a residence in Russia, 56,9 58,2 55,7 56,9 57,1 a place to live Learned about specificities 57,0 58,4 55,7 59,3 51,7 of living in Russia, about rules of conduct and relationship with local residents (from acquaintances and experienced migrants) Got contacts of relatives or 90,9 89,6 92,2 91,8 88,9 acquaintances in the place in Russia where I planned to travel Took my education papers 66,6 71,1 62,1 65,7 68,9 with myself (a university or a vocational school diploma, certificate, a retraining certificate, etc.) Learned about rules of 75,1 80,5 69,7 75,3 74,7 registration at the place of residence Learned about rules of 72,8 78,9 66,7 72,8 73,0 securing employment documents, rules of official


78 employment filing and registration Attended courses of 2,9 preparation for life in Russia Other 2,0

3,8

2,0

3,0

2,7

3,6

1,0

1,8

2,4

Table 17.2. Distribution of respondents by form of preparation for departure for Russia (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Checked my health, 79,0 82,1 77,0 77,3 77,4 submitted samples for tests, visited doctors Learned Russian on my 49,9 53,2 45,9 56,3 45,2 own Learned Russian at courses 20,7 19,3 22,4 22,7 19,0 Found out whether I am 42,0 44,4 44,1 37,5 35,7 blacklisted to enter Russia on the FMS website or via a firm, etc. Learned from acquaintances 66,6 69,0 63,4 68,0 66,7 about employment opportunities in Russia Secured employment in 33,4 39,6 31,4 32,8 23,8 Russia before departure, in advance Found a residence in 56,9 58,0 55,6 58,6 56,0 Russia, a place to live Learned about specificities 57,0 60,2 58,3 53,1 50,6 of living in Russia, about rules of conduct and relationship with local residents (from acquaintances and experienced migrants) Got contacts of relatives or 90,9 89,6 94,3 89,8 88,1 acquaintances in the place in Russia where I planned to travel Took my education papers 66,6 70,1 60,7 74,2 64,9 with myself (a university or a vocational school diploma, certificate, a retraining certificate, etc.) Learned about rules of 75,1 80,5 69,5 80,5 70,2 registration at the place of residence Learned about rules of 72,8 78,6 66,2 79,7 67,9 securing employment documents, rules of official employment filing and registration Attended courses of 2,9 4,0 1,8 3,1 2,4 preparation for life in Russia


79 Other

2,0

III. Education and retraining Table 18.1. Distribution of respondents by degree successfully communicate at work (%) Overall Tajikistan My Russian is adequate 88,7 89,8 My Russian is not adequate 9,5 9,2 My Russian is absolutely 1,8 1,0 inadequate 100,0 100, 0

of command of the Russian language to Kyrgyzstan 87,6 9,8 2,6

Males 88,9 9,4 1,7

Females 88,1 9,8 2,0

100,0

100,0

100, 0

Table 18.1.2. Distribution of respondents by degree of command successfully communicate at work (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males My Russian is adequate 88,7 89,8 87,9 My Russian is not adequate 9,5 9,1 9,7 My Russian is absolutely 1,8 1,1 2,4 inadequate 100,0 100, 0 100,0 Table 18.2. Distribution of respondents by degree successfully complete paperwork (%) Overall Tajikistan My Russian is adequate 63,8 68,5 My Russian is not adequate 25,2 21,8 My Russian is absolutely 11,0 9,7 inadequate 100,0 100, 0

of the Russian language to Tajikistan, females 89,8 9,4 0,8

Kyrgyzstan, females 86,8 10,2 3,0

100,0

100, 0

of command of the Russian language to Kyrgyzstan 59,1 28,7 12,2

Males 64,2 23,6 12,2

Females 62,8 29,1 8,1

100,0

100,0

100, 0

Table 18.2.2. Distribution of respondents by degree of command successfully complete paperwork (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males My Russian is adequate 63,8 68,6 59,2 My Russian is not adequate 25,2 20,6 26,9 My Russian is absolutely 11,0 10,8 13,9 inadequate 100,0 100, 0 100,0

of the Russian language to

Table 18.3. Distribution of respondents by degree of command successfully communicate at stores, pharmacies, mail office (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan My Russian is adequate 84,4 87 81,7 My Russian is not adequate 12,9 11,6 14,3 My Russian is absolutely 2,7 1,4 4,0 inadequate 100,0 100, 0 100,0

of the Russian language to

Tajikistan, females 68,0 25,0 7,0

Kyrgyzstan, females 58,9 32,1 9

100,0

100, 0

Males 84,8 12,2 3,0

Females 83,4 14,6 2,0

100,0

100, 0


80 Table 18.3.2. Distribution of respondents by degree of command of the Russian successfully communicate at stores, pharmacies, mail office (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females My Russian is adequate 84,4 87,4 81,9 85,9 My Russian is not adequate 12,9 11,2 13,3 12,5 My Russian is absolutely 2,7 1,4 4,8 1,6 inadequate 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

language to Kyrgyzstan, females 81,4 16,2 2,4 100, 0

Table 19. Distribution of respondents by desire to continue studying the Russian language (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females My Russian is adequate 60,6 58,0 63,2 61,3 59,0 Continue studying Russian 1,5 0,8 2,2 0,9 3,1 Wish to study Russian 35,8 39,2 32,4 35,6 36,3 Other 2,1 2,0 2,2 2,3 1,7 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 19.2. Distribution of respondents by desire to continue studying the Russian language (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females My Russian is adequate 60,6 57,4 65,7 59,8 58,3 Continue studying Russian 1,5 0,8 0,9 0,8 4,8 Wish to study Russian 35,8 39,1 31,6 39,4 33,9 Other 2,1 2,7 1,8 0,0 3,0 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 20. Distribution of respondents by place of education (%) Higher Secondary Secondary education, education vocational Incomplete secondary education education, Primary education Overall Back at homeland 23,9 31,2 81,4 In Russia 0,8 0,3 0,4 Other 0,8 0,0 0,4 Tajikistan Back at homeland 24,1 25,3 84,1 In Russia 1,4 0,6 0,4 Other 1,2 0,0 0,4 Kyrgyzstan Back at homeland 23,6 37,1 78,8 In Russia 0,2 0,0 0,4 Other 0,4 0,0 0,4

Qualification enhancement courses

1,2 0,7 0,0 0,0 1,4 0,2 0,0 1,0 0,0

Table 21. Distribution of respondents by qualification enhancement in Russia (%) In a vocational, At professional On-the-job technical school courses training Overall Yes, I am doing/I did that 0,8 2,4 31,0 I can do that and intend to do that 2,5 14,1 5,6 I wish to do that but I cannot 18,6 17,2 6,4


81 I don't need that Tajikistan Yes, I am doing/I did that I can do that and intend to do that I wish to do that but I cannot I don't need that Kyrgyzstan Yes, I am doing/I did that I can do that and intend to do that I wish to do that but I cannot I don't need that

78,1

66,3

57,0

1,2 2,8 22,4 73,6

2,6 17,3 14,6 65,5

32 5,0 9,0 54,0

0,4 2,2 14,9 82,5

2,2 10,9 19,9 67,0

30,0 6,2 3,8 60,0

Table 22. Distribution of respondents by the question of advisability of securing a higher level of education in Russia and its benefit for the future life in Russia (securing a higher salary, easier to get a job, etc.) (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Yes, it will be very helpful 23,8 27,9 19,7 24,1 23,1 It is likely to be helpful 34,4 35,5 33,3 35,0 33,2 It is unlikely to be helpful 7,5 6,0 9,0 7,8 6,8 It will not be helpful 11,2 9,4 13,1 12,7 7,8 I have not thought about it 10,3 8,8 11,8 9,1 13,2 I fail to answer 12,1 11,6 12,7 10,8 15,3 Other 0,5 0,6 0,4 0,4 0,7 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 22.2. Distribution of respondents by the question of advisability of securing a higher level of education in Russia and its benefit for the future life in Russia (securing a higher salary, easier to get a job, etc.) (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Yes, it will be very helpful 23,8 27,8 20,0 28,3 19,0 It is likely to be helpful 34,4 36,1 33,6 33,9 32,7 It is unlikely to be helpful 7,5 7,0 8,8 3,1 9,5 It will not be helpful 11,2 10,8 14,8 5,5 9,5 I have not thought about it 10,3 7,3 11,2 13,4 13,1 I fail to answer 12,1 10,5 11,2 15,0 15,5 Other 0,7 0,5 0,4 0,8 0,7 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0

IV. Work in Russia Table 23. Distribution of respondents by (%) Overall Yes, corresponded 20,4 Corresponded partially 14,4 Did not correspond 65,2 100,0

correspondence of their first job to their education Tajikistan 20,4 13,4 66,2 100, 0

Kyrgyzstan 20,5 15,5 64 100,0

Males 22,1 14,1 63,8 100,0

Females 16,3 15,3 68,4 100, 0

Table 23.2. Distribution of respondents by correspondence of their first job to their education (%) Overall Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan,


82 Yes, corresponded Corresponded partially Did not correspond

20,4 14,4 65,2 100,0

males 21,4 12,3 66,3 100, 0

males 23,0 16,0 61,0 100,0

females 17,3 16,5 66,2 100,0

Table 24. Distribution of respondents by type of departure for work (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Depart for a short stay 3,4 2,7 4,0 3,2 Spend almost the whole year, 72,7 73,4 72,0 72,9 return back to homeland for 1-23 months a year Stay in Russia almost all the 22,6 22,7 22,4 22,7 time Other 1,3 1,2 1,6 1,2 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 Table 24.2. Distribution of respondents by type of departure for work (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females Depart for a short stay 3,4 3,3 3,0 0,8 Spend almost the whole year, 72,7 73,0 72,9 74,4 return back to homeland for 1-23 months a year Stay in Russia almost all the 22,6 22,6 22,9 23,2 time Other 1,4 1,1 1,2 1,6 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

females 15,6 14,4 70,0 100, 0

Females 3,8 72,0

22,2 2,0 100, 0

Kyrgyzstan, females 6,0 70,2

21,4 2,4 100, 0

Table 25. Distribution of respondents by employment as of survey (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males 96,5 94,6 98,4 96,2

Females 97,3

Table 25.2. Distribution of respondents by employment as of survey (%) Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall Tajikistan, males males females 96,5 93,9 98,8 96,9

Kyrgyzstan, females 97,6

Table 26. Distribution of respondents by average duration of a break in employment (months) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females 2,15 1,66 3,7 1,33 4,4 Table 26.2. Distribution of respondents by average duration of a break in employment (months) Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall Tajikistan, males males females females 2,15 1,06 3,37 5,02 3,9 Responses on the primary job respondents held in Russia that was the highest-paying one Table 27. Distribution of respondents by type of current employment (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males In an organization, in a firm 65,2 55,0 75,6 66,8 Privately hired 30,9 40,4 21,2 28,9 Individual entrepreneur (own business) 2,2 3,6 0,8 2,7

Females 61,5 35,5 1,0


83 Other

1,7 100,0

1,0 100, 0

2,4 100,0

1,6 100,0

Table 27.2. Distribution of respondents by type of current employment (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females In an organization, in a firm 65,2 56,7 78,2 50,0 Privately hired 30,9 38,0 18,7 47,7 Individual entrepreneur (own 2,2 4,3 0,9 1,6 business) Other 1,7 1,0 2,2 0,7 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 Table 28. Distribution of respondents by area of employment (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Construction 22,1 32,4 11,8 Trade (wholesale and retail) 26,0 26,8 25,3 Industry 2,2 1,6 2,8 Residential and utilities stock 5,9 2,6 9,2 Services (public catering, entertainment, 23,7 19,2 28,3 hotels, etc.), except for privately rendered services at home Transportation and communications 6,9 6,0 7,8 Education 0,4 0,6 0,2 Healthcare 0,4 0,0 0,8 Services in a private household (nanny, 6,5 7,8 5,2 nurse, maid) Other 5,9 3,0 8,6 100,0 100, 0 100,0 Table 28.2. Distribution of respondents by area of employment (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males Construction 22,1 43,0 17,2 Trade (wholesale and retail) 26,0 25,0 21,8 Industry 2,2 1,9 3,0 Residential and utilities stock 5,9 2,4 10,2 Services (public catering, 23,7 12,3 23,0 entertainment, hotels, etc.), except for privately rendered services at home Transportation and 6,9 7,5 11,5 communications Education 0,4 0,3 0,3 Healthcare 0,4 0,0 0,3 Services in a private household 6,5 4,6 2,7 (nanny, nurse, maid) Other 5,8 3,0 10,0 100,0 100, 0 100,0

2,0 100, 0

Kyrgyzstan, females 70,2 26,2 0,6 3,0 100, 0

Males 30,9 23,5 2,4 6,1 17,4

Females 1,4 32,1 1,7 5,4 38,9

9,4 0,3 0,1 3,7

1,0 0,7 1,0 13,2

6,3 100,0

4,7 100, 0

Tajikistan, females 1,6 32,0 0,8 3,1 39,0

Kyrgyzstan, females 1,2 32,1 2,4 7,1 38,7

1,6

0,6

1,6 0,0 17,2

0,0 1,8 10,1

3,1 100,0

6,0 100, 0

Table 29. Distribution of respondents by strategy of job search (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Via relatives, friends, or 68,5 73,3 63,7 69,2

Females 66,8


84 acquaintances Via an intermediary or a recruiter Via state bodies (employment service, migration service) Via a private employment agency, recruitment agency, etc. Via a newspaper ad, radio or TV ad, etc. Via classifieds or an Internet ad Other

7,8 0,0

8,0 0

7,6 0

9,6 0

3,4 0

4,3

4,4

4,2

3,4

6,4

9,3

7,0

11,6

8,2

11,9

8,0 2,1 100,0

5,2 2,1 100, 0

10,8 2,1 100,0

7,5 2,0 100,0

9,2 2,4 100, 0

Tajikistan, females 74,2

Kyrgyzstan, females 61,1

3,1 0,0

3,6 0,0

8,6

4,8

7,0

15,5

5,5 1,6 100,0

12,0 3,0 100, 0

Table 29.2. Distribution of respondents by strategy of job search (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males Via relatives, friends, or 68,5 73,0 65,0 acquaintances Via an intermediary or a recruiter 7,8 9,6 9,7 Via state bodies (employment 0,0 0,0 0,0 service, migration service) Via a private employment 4,3 2,9 3,9 agency, recruitment agency, etc. Via a newspaper ad, radio or TV 9,3 7,0 9,6 ad, etc. Via classifieds or an Internet ad 8,0 5,1 10,3 Other 2,1 2,4 1,5 100,0 100, 0 100,0

Table 30. Distribution of respondents by presence of a written contract with employer (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Have a contract 56,3 42,1 70,5 56,7 55,3 Do not have a contract 43,7 57,9 29,5 43,3 44,7 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 30.2. Distribution of respondents by presence of a written contract with employer (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Have a contract 56,3 42,9 72,2 39,8 67,1 Do not have a contract 43,7 57,1 27,8 60,2 32,9 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 31. Distribution of respondents by reason for a lack of contract with the employer (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Employer refuses to make a 42,4 41,1 45,0 42,1 43,0 contract Do not need a contract 49,9 50,9 47,9 50,2 49,2 Other 7,7 8 7,1 7,7 7,8 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 31.2. Distribution of respondents by reason for a lack of contract with the employer (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Employer refuses to make a 42,4 40,5 46,0 42,7 43,4 contract


85 Do not need a contract Other

49,9 7,7 100,0

50,0 9,5 100, 0

50,6 3,4 100,0

53,3 4,0 100,0

43,4 13,2 100, 0

Table 32. Distribution of respondents by type of coworkers (local residents or migrants) (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Mostly local residents 10,6 8,4 12,9 10,2 4,5 Mostly migrants 43,2 44,8 41,6 48,1 31,5 Equally local residents and 29,4 29,7 29 28,1 32,5 migrants Work alone 16,8 17,1 16,5 13,6 24,4 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 32.2. Distribution of respondents by type of coworkers (local residents or migrants) (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Mostly local residents 10,6 8,6 12,1 7,8 14,4 Mostly migrants 43,2 50,8 45,0 27,3 34,7 Equally local residents and 29,4 27,8 28,4 35,2 30,5 migrants Work alone 16,8 12,8 14,5 29,7 20,4 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 33. Distribution of respondents by opinion on desire of local residents to have respondents' jobs (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females No, local residents don't want to 45,4 50,0 40,7 46,3 43,2 work where I work Yes, local residents want to work 30,7 27,5 33,9 30,7 30,6 where I work Fail to answer 23,9 22,5 25,4 23,0 26,2 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 33.2. Distribution of respondents by opinion respondents' jobs (%) Tajikistan, Overall males No, local residents don't want to 45,4 50,7 work where I work Yes, local residents want to work 30,7 27,2 where I work Fail to answer 23,9 22,1 100,0 100, 0

on desire of local residents to have Kyrgyzstan, males 41,3

Tajikistan, females 48,0

Kyrgyzstan, females 39,5

34,7

28,3

32,3

24,0 100,0

23,7 100,0

28,2 100, 0

Table 34. Distribution of respondents by location of their passports (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males My passport is with me 98,9 98,6 99,2 98,7 My passport is with my employer 0,6 0,8 0,4 0,9 Other 0,5 0,6 0,4 0,4 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 Table 34.2. Distribution of respondents by location of their passports (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females

Females 99,3 0,0 0,7 100, 0

Kyrgyzstan, females


86 My passport is with me My passport is with my employer Other

98,9 0,6 0,5 100,0

98,7 1,1 0,2 100, 0

98,8 0,6 0,6 100,0

98,4 0,0 1,6 100,0

100,0 0,0 0,0 100, 0

Table 35. Distribution of respondents by average monthly earnings at all jobs (RUB) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Average earnings per month 28368 28763 27967 29846 24825 (RUB) Table 35.2. Distribution of respondents by average monthly earnings at all jobs (RUB) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Average earnings per month 28368 30078 29582 24900 27768 (RUB) Table 36. Distribution of respondents by their job satisfaction in Russia (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Satisfied 51,4 42,8 60,0 52,1 Not totally satisfied 40,7 46,4 34,9 39,9 Unsatisfied 7,9 10,8 5,1 8,1 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

Females 49,8 42,7 7,5 100, 0

Table 36.2. Distribution of respondents by their job satisfaction in Russia (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females Satisfied 51,4 43,5 61,6 40,6 Not totally satisfied 40,7 45,5 33,5 49,2 Unsatisfied 7,9 11 4,9 10,2 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

Kyrgyzstan, females 56,9 37,7 5,4 100, 0

Table 37. Distribution of respondents by reasons for lack of job satisfaction (respondents could choose two answers) (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Low earnings 72,2 75,3 68,8 70,9 75,5 Working day too long, few days off 37,9 32,4 46,5 30,7 57,6 Physically hard work - always tired 56,9 59,6 51,1 61,9 43,7 Poor working conditions (poorly 22 21 23,6 26,5 9,9 arranged working space, poor equipment, etc.) Other 11,1 11,7 10,2 10,1 13,4 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 37.2. Distribution of respondents by reasons for lack of job could choose two answers) (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males Low earnings 72,2 73,6 67,4 Working day too long, few days 37,9 25,5 40,4 off Physically hard work - always 56,9 65,8 52,8 tired Poor working conditions (poorly 22 24,3 31,1 arranged working space, poor

satisfaction (respondents Tajikistan, females 80,4 55,6

Kyrgyzstan, females 71,3 58,3

40,0

47,8

10,2

9,2


87 equipment, etc.) Other

11,1 100,0

10,8 100, 0

8,3 100,0

13,7 100,0

13,3 100, 0

Table 38. Distribution of respondents by form of actual receipt of remuneration (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Officially; via bank, direct credit to my 33,3 23,7 42,9 35,3 card In cash ("in an envelope") 54,7 64,1 45,3 52,1 In part - officially, in part - unofficially 9,6 9,0 10,2 9,8 Do not get paid in a monetary form 0,3 0,6 0,0 0,4 Other 2,1 2,6 1,6 2,4 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

Females 28,4 61,1 9,1 0,0 1,4 100, 0

Table 38.2. Distribution of respondents by form of actual receipt of remuneration (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Officially; via bank, direct credit 33,3 25,7 46,2 18,0 36,3 to my card In cash ("in an envelope") 54,7 60,2 42,9 75,8 50,0 In part - officially, in part - 9,6 10,4 9,1 4,7 12,5 unofficially Do not get paid in a monetary 0,3 0,8 0,0 0,0 0,0 form Other 2,1 2,9 1,8 1,5 1,2 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 39. Distribution of respondents by average number of hours worked per working day (hours) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Average hours worked per working day 10,49 10,21 10,77 10,51 10,42 Table 39.2. Distribution of respondents by average number of hours (hours) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males Average hours worked per 10,49 10,21 10,86 working day

worked per working day Tajikistan, females 10,21

Kyrgyzstan, females 10,58

Table 40. Distribution of respondents by average number of days worked per week (days) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Average days worked per working 5,72 5,85 5,57 5,8 5,54 week Table 40.2. Distribution of respondents by average number of days worked per week (days)

Average days working week

worked

Overall per 5,72

Tajikistan, males 5,9

Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, males females 5,62 5,6

Table 41. Distribution of respondents by their ability to easily quit (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Can easily quit 87,4 84,5 90,3

Males 87,7

Kyrgyzstan, females 5,5

Females 86,7


88 Cannot easily quit Fail to answer

6,2 6,4 100,0

7,9 7,6 100, 0

4,5 5,2 100,0

6,7 5,6 100,0

Table 41.2. Distribution of respondents by their ability to easily quit (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females Can easily quit 87,4 84,3 91,4 84,9 Cannot easily quit 6,2 9,3 4,0 4,0 Fail to answer 6,4 6,4 4,6 11,1 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 Table 42. Distribution of respondents by presence of documents (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Have a valid migration card 98,6 99,4 97,8 Have a detachable migration 97,6 98,2 97,0 accounting/registration ticket Have a patent 45,3 88,0 2,2 Have a medical insurance 82,6 91,2 73,9 Have a permanent residence 17,2 15,5 18,8 permit

4,8 8,5 100, 0

Kyrgyzstan, females 88,0 5,4 6,6 100, 0

Males 98,3 97,3

Females 99,3 98,3

47,2 82,7 17,0

40,5 82,4 17,6

Table 42.2. Distribution of respondents by presence of documents (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females Have a valid migration card 98,6 99,2 97,3 100,0 Have a detachable migration 97,6 97,9 96,7 99,2 accounting/registration ticket Have a patent 45,3 87,2 2,1 90,6 Have a medical insurance 82,6 90,6 73,7 93,0 Have a permanent residence 17,2 13,9 20,5 20,3 permit

Kyrgyzstan, females 98,8 97,6 2,4 74,4 15,5

Table 43. Distribution of Kyrgyz migrants by the question of convenience of employment without patents (%) Overall Kyrgyzstan Males Females Yes, much easier 44,9 45,1 45,8 43,1 Somewhat easier to find a job 31,0 31,0 30,6 31,7 Almost no difference 8,0 7,9 8,8 6,6 No, not easier, nothing changed 4,8 4,9 5,5 3,6 Fail to answer 11,3 11,1 9,4 15,0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 100,0 Table 43.2. Distribution of Kyrgyz migrants by the question of convenience of employment without patents (%) Overall Kyrgyzstan, Kyrgyzstan, males females Yes, much easier 44,9 45,9 43,6 Somewhat easier to find a job 31,0 30,7 31,5 Almost no difference 8,0 8,5 6,8 No, not easier, nothing changed 4,8 5,5 3,6 Fail to answer 11,3 9,4 14,5 100,0 100,0 100, 0


89

V. Health Table 44. Distribution of respondents by self-assessment of their health (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Good 82,0 80,4 83,5 84,2 Satisfactory 17,6 19,2 16,1 15,5 Poor 0,4 0,4 0,4 0,3 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 Table 44.2. Distribution of respondents by self-assessment of their health (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females Good 82,0 81,5 87,3 77,3 Satisfactory 17,6 18,2 12,4 21,9 Poor 0,4 0,3 0,3 0,8 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

Females 76,6 22,7 0,7 100, 0

Kyrgyzstan, females 76,0 23,4 0,6 100, 0

Table 45.1. Distribution of respondents by the time of the last photofluorography (chest X-ray) (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females This year 54,3 60,0 48,7 52,1 59,8 Last year 33,3 29,5 37,1 33,5 32,8 More than a year ago 11,4 9,2 13,6 13,2 7,1 Never 1,0 1,3 0,6 1,3 0,3 Table 45.1.2. Distribution of respondents by the time of the last photofluorography (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females This year 54,3 58,0 45,3 65,6 55,4 Last year 33,3 29,7 37,8 28,9 35,7 More than a year ago 11,4 10,7 16,0 4,7 8,9 Never 1,0 1,6 0,9 0,8 0,0 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 45.2. Distribution of respondents by the time of the last HIV test (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males This year 57,2 63,1 51,3 56,0 Last year 31,3 28,7 33,9 31,2 More than a year ago 9,9 6,6 13,2 10,8 Never 1,6 1,6 1,6 2,0 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 Table 45.2.2. Distribution of respondents by the time of the last HIV test (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females This year 57,2 62,8 48,3 64,0 Last year 31,3 28,1 34,7 30,5 More than a year ago 9,9 7,0 15,1 5,5 Never 1,6 2,1 1,9 0,0 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

Females 60,1 31,4 7,8 0,7 100, 0

Kyrgyzstan, females 57,1 32,1 9,5 1,3 100, 0


90 VI. Migration to Russia and integration Table 46. Distribution of respondents by average time of stay in Russia, exclusive of short departures (years) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Years 4,06 4,37 3,75 4,2 3,7 Table 46.2. Distribution of respondents by average time of stay in departures (years) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males Years 4,06 4,45 3,93

Russia, exclusive of short Tajikistan, females 4,14

Table 47. Distribution of respondents by future plans to stay in Russia (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Stay here forever, for permanent 20,8 24,3 17,2 21,8 residence Live here for a while (several 27,1 22,9 31,3 27,4 years), and then return back to homeland Come here for some time, earn 37,0 39,8 34,1 35,6 money and return home Never come here again, cease to 4,0 4,4 3,6 3,8 come here for work Move to a different country 1,0 0,8 1,2 0,9 Other 0,1 0,2 0,0 0 Fail to answer 10 7,6 12,6 10,5 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 Table 47.2. Distribution of respondents by future plans to stay in Russia (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females Stay here forever, for permanent 20,8 24,3 19,0 24,2 residence Live here for a while (several 27,1 23,5 31,7 21,1 years), and then return back to homeland Come here for some time, earn 37,0 39,3 31,4 41,4 money and return home Never come here again, cease to 4,0 4,3 3,3 4,7 come here for work Move to a different country 1,0 0,8 0,9 0,8 Other 0,1 0,0 0,0 0,8 Fail to answer 10,0 7,8 13,7 7,0 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 Table 48. Distribution of respondents by residence permit (%) Overall Wish to have Russian citizenship 2,2 or permanent residence permit, filed paperwork Wish to have Russian citizenship 14,2

Kyrgyzstan, females 3,38

Females 18,2 26,4

40,2 4,4 1,4 0,3 9,1 100, 0

Kyrgyzstan, females 13,7 30,4

39,3 4,2 1,8 0,0 10,6 100, 0

wish to secure Russian citizenship or a permanent Tajikistan 2,1

Kyrgyzstan 2,3

Males 2,1

Females 2,4

15,9

12,4

13,5

15,7


91 or permanent residence permit, intend to file paperwork Wish to have Russian citizenship or permanent residence permit, haven't done anything yet Do not wish to have Russian citizenship or permanent residence permit Other Fail to answer

43,2

48,9

37,5

43,1

43,4

30,5

24,2

36,6

31,4

28,3

0,4 9,5 100,0

0,4 8,5 100, 0

0,4 10,8 100,0

0,4 9,5 100,0

0,3 9,8 100, 0

Table 48.2. Distribution of respondents by wish to secure Russian citizenship or a permanent residence permit (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Wish to have Russian citizenship 2,2 1,7 2,5 3,3 1,8 or permanent residence permit, filed paperwork Wish to have Russian citizenship 14,2 13,8 13,2 22,1 11,0 or permanent residence permit, intend to file paperwork Wish to have Russian citizenship 43,2 49,3 36,1 47,5 40,2 or permanent residence permit, haven't done anything yet Do not wish to have Russian 30,5 25,9 37,6 19,7 34,8 citizenship or permanent residence permit Other 0,4 0,6 0,3 0,0 0,6 Fail to answer 9,6 8,7 10,3 7,4 11,6 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 49. Distribution of respondents by motivation to secure Russian citizenship (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females This way it's easier to work and 63,8 65,1 62,2 65,2 60,6 live in Russia - it will be easier to gain employment, free healthcare, protection from police, but have no intention to move to Russia permanently Wish to live in Russia all the time, 25,1 24,1 26,3 24,7 26,1 move from my homeland Other 11,1 10,8 11,5 10,2 13,3 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 49.2. Distribution of respondents by motivation to secure Russian citizenship (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females This way it's easier to work and 63,8 65,9 64,1 62,6 58,8 live in Russia - it will be easier to gain employment, free healthcare, protection from police, but have no intention to move to Russia permanently


92 Wish to live in Russia all the time, 25,1 move from my homeland Other 11,1 100,0

23,0

27,1

27,5

24,7

11,1 100, 0

8,8 100,0

9,9 100,0

16,5 100, 0

Table 50. Distribution of respondents by local residents' treatment of them (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Good 52,2 53,6 50,7 50,0 Neutral 37,3 32,6 42,2 38,7 Hostile 2,6 4,0 1,2 3,3 Fail to answer 7,9 9,8 5,9 8,0 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

Females 57,3 34,1 1,0 7,5 100, 0

Table 50.2. Distribution of respondents by local residents' treatment of them (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females Good 52,2 50,5 49,4 62,5 Neutral 37,3 34,7 43,3 26,6 Hostile 2,6 4,6 1,8 2,3 Fail to answer 7,9 10,2 5,5 8,6 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

Kyrgyzstan, females 53,3 40,0 0,0 6,7 100, 0

Table 51. Distribution of respondents by help in problem resolution (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Relatives 59,5 65,1 53,9 56,0 Country fellows 66,0 73,5 58,5 67,8 Russian acquaintances 18,3 19,5 17,0 19,7 Firms 3,4 1,6 5,2 3,8 Diaspora, migrants organizations 14,9 14,9 14,8 17,3 Embassy 24,2 28,5 19,8 24,8 NGOs 19,3 14,7 23,8 19,0 Other 10,0 8,6 9,8

Females 67,9 61,8 14,9 2,4 9,1 22,6 19,9 8,1

Table 51.2. Distribution of respondents by help in problem resolution (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females Relatives 59,5 62,3 46,9 73,4 Country fellows 66,0 75,1 59,5 68,8 Russian acquaintances 18,3 21,1 18,1 14,8 Firms 3,4 1,9 6,0 0,8 Diaspora, migrants organizations 14,9 16,8 17,8 9,4 Embassy 24,2 29,1 19,9 26,6 Relatives 19,3 14,7 23,9 14,8 Other 59,5 10,4 9,1 8,6

Kyrgyzstan, females 63,7 56,5 14,9 3,6 8,9 19,6 23,8 7,7

100,0

100, 0

100,0

100,0

Table 52. Distribution of respondents by what they do in their free time (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Watch TV 55,3 59,6 51,1 57,2 Play/study with children 12,9 8,6 17,2 10,9 Socialize with friends and 67,6 71,9 63,3 70,5 acquaintances Go to movies, theater, concerts 18,9 17,7 20,0 18,9

100, 0

Females 51,0 17,6 60,8 18,9


93 Go to clubs Go to cafes and restaurants Go to gym Read Go for tours, go to museums, expos Walk around the town Other I have no free time

1,3 8,1 20,9 32,4 12,3 38,6 10,0 12,5

1,2 8,0 26,7 37,6 17,7 38,8 8,6 13,9

1,4 8,2 15,0 27,1 6,8 38,3 11,4 11,0

1,6 8,9 27,5 30,6 11,5 39,0 9,4 12,3

Table 52.2. Distribution of respondents by what they do in their free time (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females Watch TV 55,3 62,8 50,8 50,0 Play/study with children 12,9 5,1 17,5 18,8 Socialize with friends and 67,6 75,7 64,7 60,9 acquaintances Go to movies, theater, concerts 18,9 19,0 18,7 14,1 Go to clubs 1,3 1,3 1,8 0,8 Go to cafes and restaurants 8,1 9,1 8,8 4,7 Go to gym 20,9 34,0 20,2 5,5 Read 32,4 38,2 22,1 35,9 Go for tours, go to museums, 12,3 17,1 5,1 19,5 expos Walk around the town 38,6 41,7 36,0 30,5 Other 10,0 7,8 11,2 10,9 I have no free time 12,5 12,6 12,1 18,0 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 Table 53. Distribution of respondents by circle of socialization in Russia (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males With relatives 56,1 62,5 49,7 51,9 With country fellows 73,1 77,5 68,7 74,9 With coworkers – fellow migrants 44,6 49,2 39,9 47,1 With coworkers – local residents 25,6 20,3 30,9 24,3 With neighbors, where I live 16,7 20,5 12,8 17,0 With local residents 11,4 13,3 9,4 11,9 Other 0,7 1,2 0,2 0,7 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100, 0 Table 53.2. Distribution of respondents by circle of socialization in Russia (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females With relatives 56,1 58,3 44,7 75,0 With country fellow 73,1 78,9 70,4 73,4 With coworkers – fellow migrants 44,6 52,9 40,5 38,3 With coworkers – local residents 25,6 19,3 29,9 23,4 With neighbors, where I live 16,7 21,9 11,5 16,4 With local residents 11,4 14,4 9,1 10,2 Other 0,7 1,3 0,0 0,8 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

0,7 6,1 5,1 36,5 14,2 37,5 11,5 12,8

Kyrgyzstan, females 51,8 16,7 60,7 22,6 0,6 7,1 4,8 36,9 10,1 42,9 11,9 8,9 100, 0

Females 66,2 68,9 38,5 28,7 15,9 10,1 0,7 100,0

Kyrgyzstan, females 59,5 65,5 38,7 32,7 15,5 10,1 0,6 100, 0


94 Table 54. Distribution of respondents by frequency of communication with their close ones by phone (Skype, other types of VoIP) (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Females Daily 19,0 21,2 16,7 18,4 20,3 Several times a week 40,4 42,5 38,3 40,5 40,2 Several times a month 27,9 25,2 30,5 27,6 28,4 Once a month or less frequently 9,3 8,2 10,5 9,5 8,9 Almost don't call 2,1 2,2 2,0 2,5 1,1 All my close ones live here, with me 1,0 0,2 1,8 1,3 0,4 Other 0,3 0,5 0,2 0,2 0,7 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100, 0 100,0 Table 54.2. Distribution of respondents by frequency of communication with their close ones by phone (Skype, other types of VoIP) (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Overall males males females females Daily 19,0 21,2 15,3 21,4 19,5 Several times a week 40,4 42,7 38,0 41,9 39,0 Several times a month 27,9 24,5 31,2 27,4 29,2 Once a month or less frequently 9,3 8,7 10,5 6,8 10,4 Almost don't call 2,1 2,6 2,3 0,8 1,3 All my close ones live here, with 1,0 0,3 2,4 0,0 0,6 me Other 0,3 0,0 0,3 1,7 0,0 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0 100, 0 Table 55. Distribution of respondents by satisfaction with life in Russia (%) Overall Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Males Fully satisfied 22,6 20,0 25,2 24,2 Overall satisfied, but there are problems 42,7 41,7 43,8 40,7 Not bad, but there are difficulties 28,4 29,5 27,3 28,8 Find it difficult to live here 5,9 8,4 3,3 6,2 Totally unsatisfied, feel bad here 0,4 0,4 0,4 0,2 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100, 0 Table 55.2. Distribution of respondents by satisfaction with life in Russia (%) Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Overall males males females Fully satisfied 22,6 20,7 28,2 17,9 Overall satisfied, but there are 42,7 39,5 42,0 47,9 problems Not bad, but there are difficulties 28,4 30,8 26,4 25,6 Find it difficult to live here 5,9 8,7 3,4 7,7 Totally unsatisfied, feel bad here 0,4 0,3 0,0 0,9 100,0 100, 0 100,0 100,0

Females 18,9 47,4 27,4 5,2 1,1 100,0

Kyrgyzstan, females 19,5 47,1 28,8 3,3 1,3 100, 0


95 Annex 2 Questionnaire #_______ QUESTIONNAIRE To be filled by the interviewer Date of interview:

City__________________ Interviewer name:

0. Do you hold Russian citizenship or a Russian permanent residency permit? 1. Yes, I hold Russian citizenship – stop the interview. 2. Yes, I hold a Russian permanent residency permit – stop the interview. 3. No, I hold neither Russian citizenship, nor a Russian permanent residency permit – continue the interview. 01. Respondent sex 1. Male 2. Female ALL QUESTIONS ONLY REQUIRE A SINGLE ANSWER UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE I. A few questions about you and your family 1. Do you hold a Tajik or a Kyrgyz nationality? 1. Tajikistan 2. Kyrgyzstan 2. What is your ethnicity (indicate)? ______________________ (always distinguish between Pamiris and Tajiks) 3. How old are you? _______________(figure) 4. What residential area do you permanently live in? 1. In the capital 2. In a large city (more than 100 thousand residents) 3. In a small town (less than 100 thousand residents), township, district center 4. In a rural area 5. What is your education? 1. Higher (graduated from an institute, university) 2. Higher, incomplete (entered, but never graduated from, an institute, university) 3. Secondary vocational (graduated from a school, vocational school, college) 4. Secondary (graduated from a school, lyceum) 5. Secondary and below, incomplete (never graduated from a secondary school) 6. Your family status: 1. Officially married 2. Unofficially married 3. Single  Proceed to Question 8. 4. Divorced  Proceed to Question 8. 5. Widowed Proceed to Question 8. 7. Where is your husband / wife / partner today? 1. Here in Russia with me 2. Stayed back home in place of permanent residence 3. Other (indicate) 8. What is the current financial situation of your family? 1. Buy all basic things and make savings 2. Buy all basic things but don't make any savings 3. Income only covers basic needs (food, clothing, etc.) 4. Income fails to cover basic needs (food, clothing, etc.) II. Working in your homeland and preparing for migration 9. Did you work back at homeland (in Tajikistan or Kyrgyzstan)? 1. Yes. 2. No  Proceed to Question 13. 10. How long did you work back at homeland?_____ years ____ months. 11. In which area of employment did you work longest?


96 1. Construction 2. Trade (wholesale and retail) 3. Industry 4. Residential and utilities stock 5. Services (public catering, entertainment, hotels, etc.) 6. Transportation and communications 7. Education 8. Healthcare 9. Other (indicate) 12. What was your last job back at homeland and what exactly did you do? __________________________________________________________________ 13. What qualification is needed back at homeland to secure a good job in Russia? 1. Construction 2. Trade (wholesale and retail) 3. Industry 4. Residential and utilities stock 5. Services (public catering, entertainment, hotels, etc.) 6. Transportation and communications 7. Education 8. Healthcare 9. Other (indicate) 10. Not advisable to study back at (Tajikistan or Kyrgyzstan); Russia only offers low-paying jobs that do not require skills and knowledge  Proceed to Question 15. 11. Education in (Kyrgyzstan or Tajikistan) is poor; studying back at homeland will not provide skills and knowledge needed in Russia  Proceed to Question 15. 12. Fail to answer  Proceed to Question 15. 14. What qualification should it be then (indicate)?______________ 15. How did you prepare for departure for Russia? 1. Yes 2. No 1. Checked my health, submitted samples for tests, visited 1.1 1.2 doctors 2. Learned Russian on my own 2.1 2.2 3. Learned Russian at courses 3.1 3.2 4. Found out whether I am blacklisted to enter Russia on the 4.1 4.2 FMS website or via a firm, etc. 5. Learned from acquaintances about employment opportunities 5.1 5.2 in Russia 6. Secured employment in Russia before departure, in advance 6.1 6.2 7. Found a residence in Russia, a place to live 7.1 7.2 8. Learned about specificities of living in Russia, about rules of 8.1 8.2 conduct and relationship with local residents (from acquaintances and experienced migrants) 9. Got contacts of relatives or acquaintances in the place in 9.1 9.2 Russia where I planned to travel 10. Took my education papers with myself (a university or a 10.1 10.2 vocational school diploma, certificate, a retraining certificate, etc.) 11. Learned about rules of registration at the place of residence 11.1 11.2 12. Learned about rules of securing employment documents, 12.1 12.2 rules of official employment filing and registration 13. Attended courses of preparation for life in Russia 13.1 13.2 14. Other ________________________________ 14.1 14.2


97 III. Education and retraining 16. Is your Russian adequate to …. 1…communicate at work

2…to complete 3… communicate in a paperwork store, pharmacy, mail office 2.1 3.1

1. My Russian is 1.1 adequate 2. My Russian is not 1.2 2.2 3.2 adequate 3. My Russian is 1.3 2.3 3.3 absolutely inadequate 17. Do you wish to continue studying Russian? 1. No, my Russian is adequate 2. Continue studying Russian (indicate, where)_____________ 3. Wish to study Russian 4. Other (indicate)___________ 18. Where did you get your education? (1 answer in the column if there was such education; if there was higher, secondary vocational and secondary education or courses back at homeland, and in Russia, indicate 2 boxes in one column) 1. Higher 2. Secondary 3. Secondary 4. education vocational education, Qualification education Incomplete enhancement secondary courses education, Primary education 1. Back at homeland 1.1 2.1 3.1 4.1 2. In Russia 1.2 2.2 3.2 4.2 3. Other (indicate) 1.3 2.3 3.3 4.3 _________________ 19. Can you improve your qualification in Russia? 1. In a 2. At professional 3. On-the-job vocational, courses training technical school 1. Yes, I am doing/I did that 1.1 2.1 3.1 2. I can do that and intend to do that 1.2 2.2 3.2 3. I wish to do that but I cannot 1.3 2.3 3.3 4. I don't need that 1.4 2.4 3.4 20. Will securing a higher level of education in Russia help your future life in Russia (securing a higher salary, easier to get a job, etc.)? 1. Yes, it will be very helpful 2. It is likely to be helpful 3. It is unlikely to be helpful 4. It will not be helpful 5. I have not thought about it 6. I fail to answer 7. Other ______________________ IV. Working in Russia 21. Did your first job in Russia correspond to your education? 1. Yes, corresponded 2. Corresponded partially


98 3. Did not correspond 22. How do you depart for Russia to work? 1. Depart for a short stay ( ____ months), earn a bit, and then return home. 2. Spend almost the whole year, return back to homeland for 1-2-3 months a year 3. Stay in Russia almost all the time 4. Other (indicate) 23. Do you currently work? 1. Yes  Proceed to Question 25. 2. No. 24. If you don’t work, how long have you been out of job (months)? ___________ months. The following questions concern the primary place of employment when in Russia that generates the highest income (if temporarily out of job, ask about the latest job the respondent held) 25. Where do you work/ where did you work last? 1. In an organization, in a firm 2. Privately hired 3. Individual entrepreneur (own business) 4. Other (indicate) 26. What is your area of employment? 1. Construction 2. Trade (wholesale and retail) 3. Industry 4. Residential and utilities stock 5. Services (public catering, entertainment, hotels, etc.) 6. Transportation and communications 7. Education 8. Healthcare 9. Services in a private household (nanny, nurse, maid, personal driver) 10. Other (indicate) 27. What is your job in Russia about and what exactly are you doing? __________________________________________________________________ 28. How did you find this job? 1. Via relatives, friends, or acquaintances 2. Via an intermediary or a recruiter 3. Via state bodies (employment service, migration service) 4. Via a private employment agency, recruitment agency, etc. 5. Via a newspaper ad, radio or TV ad, etc. 6. Via classifieds or an Internet ad 7. Other (indicate) 29. Do you have a written contract with your employer? 1. Yes  Proceed to Question 31 2. No. 30. If not, why? 1. Employer refuses to make a contract 2. Do not need a contract 3. Other (indicate) 31. Who are your coworkers? 1. Mostly local residents 2. Mostly migrants 3. Equally local residents and migrants 4. Work alone 32. Do you think local residents want your job? 1. No, local residents don't want to work where I work


99 2. Yes, local residents want to work where I work 3. Fail to answer 33. Where is your passport? 1. My passport is with me 2. My passport is with my employer

3. Other (indicate)

34. What are your monthly earnings (RUB)? (if difficult to calculate a monthly average, indicate your last month’s earnings) RUB 35. Are you satisfied with your job here? 1. Satisfied  Proceed to Question 37. 2. Not totally satisfied 3. Unsatisfied 36. If you are not satisfied with your job here, please tell us why (choose no more than 2 options)? 1. Low earnings 2. Working day too long, few days off 3. Physically hard work - always tired 4. Poor working conditions (poorly arranged working space, poor equipment, etc.) 5. Other (indicate) 37. How do you receive your remuneration? 1. Officially; via bank, direct credit to my card 2. In cash ("in an envelope") 3. In part - officially, in part - unofficially 4. Do not get paid in a monetary form 5. Other (indicate) _______________________________________________ 38. How many hours do you work per day on average (hours)? ____________ hours 39. How many days a week do you work (days)? ________________ days 40. Can you easily quit if you wish so? (don't ask businesspeople this question). 1. Can easily quit 2. Cannot easily quit 3. Fail to answer 41. Do you currently (at your last job) work in Russia using your qualification? 1. Yes, my job corresponds to my qualification that I got back at homeland. 2. No, my job doesn’t correspond to my qualification. 3. I had no qualification back at homeland, I got it here in Russia as part of on-the-job training. 4. Other (indicate)___________________________________________ 42. What listed documents do you have? (you can choose all options) 1. Have a valid migration card 4. Have a medical insurance 2. Have a detachable migration 5. Have a permanent residence permit accounting/registration ticket 3. Have a patent 6. Other (indicate)_____________ Only for holders of a Kyrgyz passport 43. Has it become easier for you to gain employment now that you no longer have to have a patent (since mid 2015)? 1. Yes, much easier 2. Somewhat easier to find a job 3. Almost no difference 4. No, not easier, nothing changed 5. Fail to answer V. Health 44. How do you assess the state of your health?


100 1. Good 2. Satisfactory 3. Poor 45. When was the last time you …. (choose one answer in each column) 1. … had fluorography 2. … took an HIV test? (chest X-ray)? 1. This year 1.1 2.1 2. Last year 1.2 2.2 3. More than a year ago 1.3 2.3 4. Never 1.4 2.4 VI. Migration to Russia and integration 46. How long have you been staying in Russia (exclusive of short trips back home)? ___ years __ months. 47. What are your plans for staying in Russia in the future? 1. Stay here forever, for permanent residence 2. Live here for a while (several years), and then return back to homeland 3. Come here for some time, earn money and return home 4. Never come here again, cease to come here for work  Proceed to Question 50. 5. Move to a different country (which one?).______________________________  Proceed to Question 50. 6. Other (indicate) 7. Fail to answer. 48. Do you wish to secure a Russian citizenship or a permanent residence permit? 1. Wish to have Russian citizenship or permanent residence permit, filed paperwork 2. Wish to have Russian citizenship or permanent residence permit, intend to file paperwork 3. Wish to have Russian citizenship or permanent residence permit, haven't done anything yet 4. Do not wish to have Russian citizenship or permanent residence permit  Proceed to Question 50. 5. Other (indicate)_______________ 6. Fail to answer 49. Why do you wish to secure Russian citizenship? (choose only one answer) 1. This way it's easier to work and live in Russia - it will be easier to gain employment, free healthcare, protection from police, but have no intention to move to Russia permanently 2. Wish to live in Russia all the time, move from my homeland 3. Other ______________________ 50. How are you treated by local residents in this town? 1. I am treated well 2. I am treated neutrally 3. I am treated hostilely 4. Fail to answer 51. Who helps you resolve your problems? (choose any number of answers) 1. Relatives 2. Country fellows 3. Russian acquaintances 4. Firms 5. Diaspora, migrants organizations 6. NGOs 7. Embassy 8. Other (indicate)___________________________ 52. What do you usually do in your free time (choose any number of options)? 1. Watch TV 2. Play/study with children 3. Socialize with friends and acquaintances


101 4. Go to movies, theater, concerts 5. Go to clubs 6. Go to cafes and restaurants 7. Go to gym 8. Read 9. Go for tours, go to museums, expos 10. Walk around the town 11. Other (indicate) __________________________________________ 12. У меня нет свободного времени. 53. Who do you usually socialize with in this town? (choose any number of options) 1. With relatives 2. With country fellows 3. With coworkers – fellow migrants 4. With coworkers – local residents 5. With neighbors, where I live 6. With local residents 7. Other (indicate) __________________________________________ 54. How frequently do you call your close ones by phone or Skype/VoIP? 1. Daily 2. Several times a week 3. Several times a month 4. Once a month or less frequently 5. Almost don’t call 6. All my close ones live here, with me 7. Other ___________________ 55. How satisfied with life in Russia are you? 1. Fully satisfied. 2. Overall satisfied, but there are problems. 3. Not bad, but there are difficulties. 4. Find it difficult to live here. 5. Totally unsatisfied, feel bad here. Thank you for your answers!


102 Annex 3 Questionnaire for interviews with migrant workers from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan I. A few questions about you and your family Do you hold a Tajik or Kyrgyz citizenship? What ethnicity do you consider yourself? (always distinguish between Pamiris and Tajiks) How old are you? Where did you come to Russia from? What education do you have? II. Working in Russia What job did you take in Russia the first time you came here and why? Did it correspond to your qualification, your education? Why do you think that happened? Follow-up questions on the primary job in Russia that yields the highest income Where are you working today? What is your job in Russia today and what exactly do you do? How did you secure this job? Who helped you? How did that happen? What is the best way to search for a job in Russia? Provide examples of how fellow migrants are looking for a job? How does that happen? Do you have a written contract with your employer? If not, why? What prevented you from making such a contract? Who works alongside you? Do you think local residents would wish to have your job? Why do you think this happens? How are you treated at your workplace? Are you satisfied with your job here? Why? If not, why? Were you misled by your employer and what did you do in such a case? How often did that happen? Is there a way to protect yourself against this? Do you receive your remuneration officially or not? How did you negotiate your salary? How much do you earn? Are Russian local residents paid more or less than you and are fellow migrants paid more or less than you? Why do you think this is happening? How many hours a day do you work? How many days a week do you work? How frequently do you have days off? Does your current job in Russia correspond to your qualification? Was it easy to secure a job consistent with your qualification? What is preventing you from working a job corresponding to your qualification if it currently does not correspond to your qualification? Why do you think this happened?

Only for those holding Kyrgyz passports Is it easier for you to secure employment now that you no longer have to obtain a patent (effective 2015)? In what way this having become easier manifests itself? Provide a few examples. Did your salary increase after patents were repealed? If so, by how much? If you were holding a Russian passport, would it have simplified your securing employment or not? What do you think? III. Education and retraining Do you want to improve your education and qualification in Russia? How can you do it? Have you done it? In particular, do you want to attend special courses or a Russian college, vocation school, higher education institution? Will it help you secure better employment in Russia or earn more? Why? VI. Migration to Russia and integration How many years have you been in Russia (excluding short trips back to homeland)? What are your plans for staying in Russia? What hinders them and what helps them? Would you wish your children to work in Russia? What education do they have to get in order to do so? Why? Do children have to get this education in Russia or back at homeland? Why? Would you wish your children to study in a Russian college (vocational school, technical school)? Did you try to search for a suitable college for them? Or will they only have to enter a Russian higher education institution?


103 V. Media What do you watch, listen to, and read in Russia? TV, radio, newspapers, or Internet? Name a few. What is the language of what you watch, listen to, and read in Russia and how often? Are those media products Russian or Kyrgyz (Tajik)? Do you use them for recreation, job search, rent search, news? What particular ones do you use, and what for? Are there media outlets that wrote about migration and migrants? Name a few. FOR KYRGYZ MIGRANTS – do you know what «migrant,” “Ferghana,” “Boorsok,” “Komuz,” migrants’ newspapers “Nur” and “Migrant Worker” are? Do you use ―Odnoklassniki,‖ ―Vkontakte,‖ or ―Facebook‖ social networks? What for? Thank you for your answers!


104 Annex 4 1. Assess short-term and long-term needs of the Russian labor market. How secure will Kyrgyz and Tajik migrants feel in them both during the crisis and after it passes? 2. What occupations available to Kyrgyz and Tajik migrants will be popular in the medium and long run? 3. How is the migrant market shaped in Russia? Has anything changed in it over the past years? Has it changed for Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan as a result of these countries’ having joined the EEU? 4. What measures in Russia, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan in the long run will help migrants secure employment in Russia consistent with their qualification and needs? What institutes have to be involved? How can employers be involved? 5. Is the professional level of Kyrgyz and Tajik migrants changing? Are there prospects for changes or will the situation remain as is? 6. What strategy in using and developing professional skills of migrants in Russia can be utilized? Are colleges and higher education institutions ready for the retraining of migrants? Will such retrained migrants be needed in Russia? 7. What needs to be changed in the Russian migration policy so as to better use migrant workers’ professional skills? What ministry should be responsible for this and what agency should it be subordinated to, and how should it cooperate with other ministries and agencies? What needs to be changed in the Migration Policy Concept in the medium and long run?


105 Annex 5 List of experts Moscow 1 Zayonchkovskaya, Janna Antonovna

2

Mkrtchyan, Nikita Vladimirovich

3

Savin, Igor Sergeyevich

4

Alimardanova, Tursunoy

5

Ivakhnyuk, Irina Valentinovna

6

Vorobyova, Olga Dmitriyevna

7

Karimov, Renat Ismagilovich

8

Imomnazarova, Khosiyat

9

Saint Petersburg Abashin, Sergey Nikolayevich

10

Brednikova, Olga Yevgenyevna

11

Yakimov, Andrey Nikolayevich

12

Yekaterinburg Nekrasova, Irina Yuryevna

13

Vandyshev, Mikhail Nikolayevich

14

Grishin, Leonid Aleksandrovich

15

Lukanin, Aleksandr Nikolayevich

Laboratory ―Analysis and Projection of Migration,‖ Head, Institute for People’s Economy Projection, Russian Academy of Sciences, Ph.D. in Geography Lead Research Fellow, Institute for Demography, ―Higher School of Economics‖ National Research University, Ph.D. in Geography Research Fellow, Institute for Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, Ph.D. in History Consultant, Information and Resource Center, International Organization for Migration, Head, Central Committee, Trade Union of Migrant Workers Associate Professor/Senior Research Fellow, Ph.D. in Economics, Department of Population, School of Economics, M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University Professor, Ph.D. in Economics, Moscow Psychology and Sociology University Director, Central Committee, Trade Union of Migrant Workers Coordinator, Tajik Area, ―Migration and Law‖ Integration Center, Regional Public Organization Professor, Department of Anthropology, European University in Saint Petersburg, Professor Emeritus (British Petroleum), Ph.D. in History Research Fellow, Center for Independent Social Studies Ethnic Minorities and Migrant Workers Expert, Charitable Foundation for Support and Development of Education and Social Projects Lawyer, ―Migration and Law‖ Integration Center, Regional Public Organization Adjunct Professor, Department of Theory and History of Sociology, Institute for Social and Political Sciences, Uralsk Federal University, Ph.D. in Social Sciences Chairperson, ―Uralskiy Dom‖ Regional Public Organization (town of Zarechniy, Sverdlovskaya Province) Director, Sverdlovskaya Province Branch, ―Passport and Visa Service‖ Federal State Unitary Enterprise, Federal Migration Service of the Russian Federation


Poletaev report final version eng 2