Gender equality and extension of women rights in Russia
within millennium development goals

3. Gender equality on labour market, what is this?

Majority of Russian participating population, both men and women are wage workers (92.4% and 93.6% respectively in 2001). The main part of their prosperity is generated thanks to their employment, wage and salary income. That is why the basis of economic gender equality or inequality is the situation of men and women on labour market.

Situation on labour market is first of all defined by two parameters groups: parameters of employment and unemployment, i.e. characteristics of availability and type of work places, and by wage parameters. It is important to find answers on two questions. How do employment gender structures differ? Are there gender differences in economic returns from labour activity? And to reveal factors of existing differences.

3.1. Participation in the labour force

Degree of participation in labour activity, possibilities of women's employment reflects the participation rate in the labour force. To estimate population participation rate Goskomstat RF Labour Force Survey (LFS) data are used. Change of profiles as per LFS data (fig. 2) shows decrease of participation rate during 90-s, both for men and women. And this participation rate decrease happened primarily for account of marginal age groups, i.e. young and aged people. General history of change by gender groups is usually similar. Men to some greater degree experienced decrease for elder ages account, women - for account of younger ages and age groups of 25-29 years, 30-34 years.

Alternative estimations of population participation may be received using RLMS data. Estimation of participation scales based on RLMS data differ from estimation based on LFS data (fig. 1). Generally, RLMS data show greater synchrony of participation rate variations for men and women. However, men's participation rate in the labour force for main working ages decreased to a greater degree than as per LFS data.

From the other hand, according to RLMS data, average participation rate in the labour force actually did not change during 90-s, which contradicts to LFS data and does not comply with assumptions on character of population behaviour adjustment to economic parameters change in countries in transition³. Exit from participating population was one of people's adaptation method to new realities of labour market and crisis development of economy. But, in any case, both Goskomstat data and RLMS data show that there was insignificant decrease of participating population in Russia, including women.

Thus, generally, a very high women's participation rate in the labour force is maintained in Russia. This was promoted by the fact that constant labour activity of women as during socialist period is still necessary for household budget. For most households, one working member of family can not provide necessary level of consumption and prosperity. Moreover, high level of women's employment is supported by developed social traditions and high education level. Participation of women in bringing income activity is socially acceptable standard of behaviour. Women retain wide possibilities for employment and access to work places.

Analysis of factors influencing participation rate in the labour force by gender groups shows some differences⁴. So, participation of women, unlike men, is negatively influenced by quantity of children. This result can be easy explained, these are women who bear main load concerned with children education. Education level positively influences participation rate in the labour force of women stronger (than for men). This means that education brings more return for women in terms of improvement of position on labour market. For men, health parameters have stronger (than for women) effect on participation rate in the labour force change. Trends of health effects on participation in the labour force are similar both for men and women, but when health parameters are very bad participation rate in the labour force of men decreases stronger.

Fig. 1. Labor force participation rate based on RLMS data

Fig. 2. Labor force participation rate based on Russian Goscomstat data (LFS)

The negative influence of pensions, incomes of other, besides husband, members of family, regional unemployment rate is registered only for men. In the same time positive influence of age, level of regional wages and negative influence of pensionary and student status, husband income are registered both for men and women. This is the evidence that structures of factors influencing participation, similar for men and women. High level of women employment resulted in the fact that women when taking decisions on participation in the labour force like men. But the effect of hopeless worker and income effect that decrease participation rate in the labour force is appropriate rather for men than for women. Thus, men's participation on labour market depends to a greater degree on economic factors, and women's participation - on social and demographic factors.

3.2. Unemployment

Besides participation rate in the labour force, unemployment rate is an important characteristic of men's and women's economic status. Accounting and registration of unemployment have started in Russia in 1992. The predominance of women (70%) among registered unemployed in 90-s initially has made an idea of "women's face" of unemployment in Russia. But analysis of unemployed structures defined by Goskomstat as per ILO methods based on LFS shows that unemployment is uniformly distributed among men and women, and unemployment rate is higher for men. Higher probability of registration of unemployed women as to compare with men is concerned with more passive methods of work search by women and with the fact that for part of them status of registered unemployed person is a convenient way of transition to non-participating population and leaving labour market. The analysis shows that proportion of women among registered unemployed depends on unemployment rate; it grows when unemployment rate is low, and vice versa.

Thus, unemployment level is not concerned with significant gender differences. But women are characterized by longer period of work search. Proportion of those who are unemployed for a long time is higher among them.

Indeed, lower level of leaving unemployment status for women is concerned with worse conditions for employment, lower competitive position on labour market, which is the reflection, among other factors, of discrimination practice of Russian employers. In the same time longer period of search reflects also more passive behaviour of women, their lesser activity during work search, lesser motivation for employment.

Taking into account that long-term unemployment results in great losses in human capital, creates relatively significant expenses for households, a conclusion can be made that though unemployment by its scales concerns men and women equally, consequences for them turn out to be different. Women's unemployment by virtue of its long-term nature is one of mechanisms of women withdrawal from labour market. Unemployed women are more problem group because loss of work for them is concerned with lesser possibility to leave unemployment status as to compare with men.

3.3. Wages

The level of wages is one of the most important parameters. In conditions when larger part of employed population is hired, level of wage defines significantly level of individuals and households living standards, economic possibilities of investments to human development. Moreover, wage level shows efficiency of economic return from human capital. Gender equality of wage is also in many ways the basis for alignment of family status of men and women, provides to a greater degree an equal access to family expenses, creates basis for economic independence of women.

As a rule difference in wages of men and women is explained by inequality in men and women distribution by individual trades and industries (horizontal segregation), inequality in wages within trades and kinds of activity (vertical segregation), and low evaluation of women's work. If differences in qualitative characteristics of men's and women's working force were the main reason of unequal remuneration, then it would be expected that similar parameters of participation rate in the labour force of education would result in similar wage level. But it does not happen.

Systematic statistic of wage taking into account gender factor was absent until recently. Only in latest period Goskomstat RF data permitted to evaluate gender gap in wages. Thus, in 1998 average wage of women in economy was 70% from average wage of men, in 2000 – 63.2%, in 2001 – 63%. But it is right for large and medium-sized enterprises only. Inclusion of small enterprises in statistic would increase this gap. Since small enterprises often have smaller level of wage many risks are shifted to workers, and women to a greater degree are concentrated in service area for which enterprises are characteristic with small number of employed. Globally, general level of gender differences in wages is comparable with level monitored in many developed countries. But a trend of gender gap increase is anxious.

RLMS data provide more detailed information. They show that relation of women's wage to men's wage was pretty stable and was about 60%.

When comparing wage levels two circumstances should be taken into account. In 90-s a significant problem existed, that of non-payment and delays of wages. It concerned to a greater degree men than women. That is why differences in wages should be corrected for increase. Second, as a rule, a comparison is performed of wage level received at principal place of business. But in Russian economy a moonlighting phenomenon is developed. And men to a greater degree have second work, and for other equal conditions have higher wage there than women⁵. Thus, comparison of wages at all works increases gender break in work income also.

However, comparison of average level of wages, remaining an important indicator of men's and women's participation, hides the reasons of these differences. Existing gap should not be connected only with worse, against men, positions of women in economy, or only with discrimination factors. Qualitative characteristics of men's and women's human capital, modes and fields of employment may differ significantly, and these differences will contribute to increase the average wages gap.

Analysis of determinants of gender gap in wages as per RLMS data for 2001 shows⁶ that the most large gender break in payment is registered in professional groups where women working force is in excess - in trades groups requiring high specialized and higher education where women earn less than men by 47% and 45% on average. In age groups wages of men and women approximate in preretirement age, and the biggest gap is in group of 41-45 years.

Women are much more often than men employed half-time⁷ – in 13% as to compare with 4%. However, for both this proportion has diminished significantly during last 5-6 years⁸.

In 2001 there was trend concerned with relative advantage of working women by general quantity of education years. As per RLMS data this value came to 12.9 years for women and 12.6 – for men. But in the same time, men employed as professionals of high and middle categories, professionals with higher and high specialized education, clerks and service workers and shop and market sales workers employed in service area surpass women by quantity of education years. I.e. educational level of women is distributed more uniformly, against men, by professional groups.

As for return of investments to education we can note that the biggest average wage for main place of work goes to workers finished or continuing education at postgraduate training; however, women passed postgraduate training earn on average less than men with high education only. Women with higher education earn more as to compare only with one men category - men with uncompleted high education. In the same time in several Russian regions women with uncompleted high education earn more⁹ than women with high education.

As per RLMS data for 2001 general time record of women (excluding full-time education in institute or technical school) came to 17.4 years, men – 17.1 years. However, it does not completely reflect the situation because the sampling is strongly age-shifted due to different retirement age. Corrected time record corresponding to uniform distribution of workers of both sexes by age: is 16.5 years for women and 19.7 years for men. Corrected work record at the last enterprise characterising level of specific human capital is 7.6 years for women and 6.5 years for men.

Unpaid wages and wages in kind were used in 2001, as before, for workers with lowest qualification. 42% of men having no certificate of secondary education experienced delays in payments and/or wages in kind of goods manufactured at enterprise where they work. On average this problem affected 20% of women and 23% of men.

Several important trends are noted when analysing returns from investments to human capital in 2001. Benefits are maintained from higher education, both for men and women. This positive trend appeared for women already in mid 90-s. If in 1996 college degree, with other equal conditions, would increase wage of woman having only certificate of secondary education by 34%, then in 2000 – by 56%¹⁰. In 2001 rate of returns from investments to higher education for women grew up to 61% (as to compare with the same base). However, from the end of 90-s limit return rate from postgraduate training has been decreasing.

In the same time a negative return from high education of women is noted. Negative influence was also related to education in vocational school, both with or without high education. Education in technical school or specialized school increased, with other equal conditions, wages of men by 12%, women – by 10% (as to compare with category of uncompleted high education). In the mid of 90-s return of this kind of education was more sensible for women; for men, to the contrary, return slightly grew in the intervening years.

Women's wages grow with the increase of years, reach maximum in 44 years and then start to decrease. Men experience this on average earlier, in 38 years. If to consider existing sampling as a conventional generation, we can say that wage of women in course of time does not change so significantly as men's wage does. Women's profile age-wages is lower than men's one and is more flat. Gender break in wages decreases while reaching retiring age.

Thus, a conclusion can be made that differences in human capital characteristics reduced gender break in payment. Women had rather significant advantages in human capital, which permitted to reduce the gap to some degree: if women had characteristics equal with men the gap would grow by 7.4 percent.

Arrears of payment distribution, payments in kind, half-time was also favourable for women in terms of gender differences in payment. However, the influence of these factors on gender difference was in 10 times less, than difference in human capital characteristics.

Significant determinant of gender differences in payment in 2001 was occupational segregation that have 15 percent points or approximately one third¹¹ of cumulative difference in wages. Influence character of occupational segregation on gender break is mostly characterized by the fact that the lowest return was noted in those professional groups where women predominated, and the biggest one - in traditional "men's" trades. Thus, the wages of industrial workers, operators, engine men is higher by 35%, as to compare with unskilled workers, and corresponding parameters for professionals and experts with higher or high specialized education are – 31-32%. The advantage in payment of clerks and service workers and shop and market sales workers is 13% only.

Domination of women in public sector and their deficiency in foreign companies made positive, but not considerable contribution to gender break in payment. If their distribution by these sectors was absolutely uniform, cumulative difference in payment would decrease by 2.7 percent points.

Health factor (considered by respondents self-rating) "explained" approximately the same proportion of gender break in payment: 2.6 percent points. Good health provided 16% growth in wages of women and 7% growth for men.

So, main determinants of gender differences in wages on Russian labour market in 2001 are gender discrimination¹², occupational segregation, differences by type of enterprise proprietor (public sector or foreign company) that made positive contribution to the gap. As well as differences in human capital characteristics (age, education level, specific work record), distribution of wages delays, wages in kind, reduction of working time that prevented gap increase by 7 percent points.

3.4. Segregation

Gender segregation reveals in males and females asymmetric distribution within different structures: branch, occupational and official. At that horizontal and vertical segregations are marked out. Horizontal segregation reveals within different occupational groups, and vertical one reveals within the same occupational category. Branch and occupational segregation may be considered in this case a horizontal one and official segregation may be considered a vertical one.

Statistics permit to evaluate by sex only the branch and occupational segregation. At that the occupational segregation should not be considered as a horizontal one only. The distribution by 10 occupational groups reflects both horizontal and vertical segregation¹³.

Segregation by industry. On the whole a conclusion may be made that the main sphere of female employment is the service branch. Almost 60 % of females are employed in it while the male employment in this branch amounts only to less than 30%. The services sector expansion within the last third of the XXth century has been stimulating the female employment increase, creating working places, demand for female labour, but at the same time contributing to the labour market segregation.

For a more detailed analysis let us use an approach in which the branches with female share amounting to less than 33% are called "male" and those with more than 66% of female labour - "female". The remaining branches are marked out into the third, intermediary branches category.

From 15 branches (this division is used by the Goskomstat - State Committee for Statistics) no considerable changes have happened within 12 ones during all the 1994 through 2001 period. Thus the forestry (where the female share amounts to only 1/5th), the construction (here the females' share has not exceeded 25% within the considered 8 years period), the transport (the male share in this branch has kept the level of approx. 74%) and the remaining branches pooled into the category "other branches" may be called "male" branches.

Such branches as: the Public health, Physical culture, and Social security (the male percentage in this branch never exceeded 20% level within this period of 8 years), Education (in this branch the female share amounts to about 4/5), Culture and Art (the branch more than the other "female" branches getting close to the intermediary branches having female share of 67.5% to 69%) and Finances, Credit and Insurance (within 1994 to 2001 period the female share of this branch has decreased from 74.5 to 71.4%) - have experienced the highest female concentration within this period. Industry; wholesale and retail trades, catering; housing and communal services, non-productive kinds of population services, as well as scientific services have permanently stayed within the intermediary branches category. At that, if in the Industry within the considered 8 years a trend to smooth decrease of the female share (by 4.3% from 1994 to 2001), in the housing and communal services, non-productive kinds of population services, conversely, the female share increased (by 3.9%). And at the very beginning of the period the wholesale and retail trades, catering branch was on the brink of changing to the "female" category, but by 2001 the female share of this branch decreased from 65 to 61.1%.

The following branches have been switching from one category to another within this period: Agriculture, which in 1994 through1996 and 1999 through 2001 was within the intermediary branches category, in 1997 and 1998 switched to the male category (as its female share during these years amounted to 31.7%). Communication (this branch from "female" category where it was in 1994 through1995 switched to intermediary branches category, apart from this the female share of this branch started to decrease steadily and within 8 years decreased down to 7%) and Management. The latter branch during this period experienced the most important changes. If in 1994 this branch was "female", with the female share amounting to 69%, starting from 1995 the male share of this branch began to increase distinctly. In 1996 and 1997 the male and female shares of this branch equalized and in 2001 the males a bit outweighed the females. I.e. during all the period the female share in this branch has decreased by 24.5%.

What may these changes in the branch structure be connected to? This may be explained by the decrease of the general share of females participating in the labour force. But the data testify that the female share during all the period has been more or less stable. Therefore the changes in the branch structure have nothing to do with the exclusion of women from the public production field into the household, private field. It turns out that a simple branch restructuring has taken place (women were switching from some branches to others). Thereby female shares decrease in one branches has been compensated by their increase in the others.

Nevertheless simple separation of "male", "female" and intermediary branches shows an incomplete account. As it is difficult to evaluate straight off the real general sexwise segregation by industry. To make such evaluation possible four segregation indices have been calculated: ID, SR, WE and MM for the whole period considered by us¹⁴.

What do the gender segregation indices calculation results evidence of? It is at first sight that the indices calculation results seem ambiguous: three indices from four (except SR) kept at approx. the same level, while the SR values decreased almost by a quarter.

Fig. 3. Segregation by industries dynamics 1994-2001 (SR)

Each of four indices notional constituents somehow differ one from another. ID, WE determine how close the real situation is to the one which could exist if in all the branches (occupations) the male and female shares agree with their general share in the economy.

MM is considered more adequate at segregation evaluation, as it is cleared of changes effects within the labour market branch structure, i.e. within the occupied share accounting for one or another branch and in the occupied gender structure according to sex attribute (in this case changing in male and female shares of occupied in the economy could not affect as the number of males and females stayed approx. the same within all the period).

SR is directed to another aspect of segregation: females concentration within female branches (occupations) as compared to males concentration within "male" branches (occupations).

As a result one can make a conclusion that segregation by industry within the considered period from 1994 to 2001 has not changed as a whole. On average according to the three indices (ID, WE and MM) it amounted to 33%.

Fig. 4. Segregation by industries dynamics 1994-2001 (ID, WE and MM)

The SR index values, which never exceeded 1, evidence the following trend: females number within "female" branches (occupations) as compared to males number within "male" branches (occupations) is much lesser (in relative expression). And the changes dinamics of this index tell that females number in "female" branches have been decreasing more and more as compared to males number in the "male" branches.

Occupational segregation Goskomstat data does not permit to carry out the occupational segregation evolution that is why RLMS data was used for this purpose. For occupational structure analysis the kinds of activity classification by 10 occupational groups was used: military personnel; officials; professionals; technicians and associate professionals; clerks; service workers and shop and market sales workers; skilled agricultural and fishery workers; industrial workers; installations operators and machinists; elementary occupations. Immediately one may note that within most of the occupational groups only minor changes have taken place. I.e. the occupational groups stayed within the same categories ("male", "female" and intermediary) which they had belonged to. And only some occupational groups from one category switched to other ones.

Within all the period the following occupational groups have stayed "male": military personnel occupation (in this group the lowest females concentration has been observed: during all the period their share never exceeded 12%); qualified agriculture and fish industry workers; operators and machinists of installations, industry workers. However some changes have been observed in these occupational groups too. Thus as compared to 1994, in 2001 within military personnel and industrial workers groups a bit more females appeared, but within qualified agriculture and fish industry workers vice versa females number decreased.

All the time from 1994 to 2001 the following occupational groups have stayed "female": clerks; professionals with secondary education and service workers and shop and market sales workers. In 1994 through 1995 the latter group was very close to becoming an intermediary one. However starting from 1996 it has become a sure "female" group (during all the period the female share in this group varied from 70.2 to 78.8%). Within the office employees and client services group female share stayed at approx. the same level (on average the female share amounted to 90%). As to the professionals with secondary education group, the female share here decreased by 7% within the 7 years.

The employment occupational gender structure conforms to the branch structure to a great extent. The females are more occupied not only in the service sector branches, but are involved in the activities which are connected to services to a greater degree.

The elementary occupations intermediary occupational group have been permanently within this category from 1995 to 2001. However, if in 1994 through 1995 this occupational group was rather "female" wise, but in 1996 through 2001 the male and female shares started to get closer to each other.

Only two of the ten occupational groups experienced considerable changes connected to switching to another category within the considered period. These are the experts with higher education which as far as in 1994 was intermediary and from 1995 became a "female" one, and officials group which from 1994 to 1996 was "male" and from 1997 the female share has grown so much that this occupation passed to the intermediate occupations group (from 1997 to 2001 the female share growth amounted to 21%).

In this case again the female shares growth/recession processes compensate each other within individual occupational groups. I.e. the sexes shift takes place not only within the branch structure but also within the occupational one.

How has the occupational segregation changed in general from 1997 to 2001? With this purpose let us turn to the ID, SR, W? and ?? segregation indices. It should be noted that due to lack of Goskomstat data on male and female occupational distribution in 1994 through 1996 we will consider only the 1997 through 2001 period.

Unlike the branch segregation, whose parameters had various change trends the occupational segregation did not have any important leaps at that side or the other: all the indices from 1997 to 2001 have kept their values at approx. the same level (variations within 1%). But if one has a closer look at their changes trends, it is possible to see that they differ slightly one from another.

Thus though the SR in 1999 through 2000 has been increasing in 2001 its value decreased from 2.27 to 2.07. The ID trend is similar to the WE change trend (unlike the SR trend in 1999 through 2000 their values have been decreasing and further on started to grow slightly): in 1999 they assumed minimal values for all the period concerned. The MM has been decreasing smoothly and slightly during all the period from 1997 to 2001 (from 45.7 to 44.1%). Unlike the branch segregation values the ID, WE and MM arrangement of curves do not exactly repeat one another.

What do these results indicate? Occupational segregation for the concerned period from 1997 to 2001 have not changed. On average its value (according to the ID, WE and MM indices) amounted to 46%. It is a rather high index. If all the three indices approached 0 this would mean that the gender segregation does not exist within the occupational employment structure. If their value reached 1, the gender segregation would be maximal. Thus the gender segregation in Russia is somewhere in the middle of this interval (where the extreme points are full absense of gender segregation and maximal segregation). However in case of the occupational segregation the SR index have been permanently higher than 1 which indicates that in the occupational employment structure (unlike in the branch one) there are more females in the "female" occupations as compared to males in the "male" occupations.

If the MM index is interpreted separately as more adequate for similar evaluations, the following results. The 1998 crisis has had no effect on the occupational segregation (unlike the branch one). At least the MM index decrease trend has been smooth and no "peaks" or "cavities" in connection with the 1998 are observed. It comes out that during the crisis almost no changes happened within the occupational structure. I.e. the dismissal process was asymmetric only within the branch aspect, but within the occupational one it passed rather evenly for all occupational categories of both male and female labour.

Fig. 5. Occupational segregation dynamics 1997-2001 (SR)

So firstly, segregation by industry has been much lower than the occupational one. The occupational segregation from 1997 to 2001 has decreased, though slightly. And all the same the occupational segregation is rather high and amounts to approx. 48% on average (the average value according to the ID, WE and MM indices). The segregation by industry is lower than the occupational one and on average within all the period from 1994 to 2001 it amounted to about 33%.

Secondly, if the SR index values are analysed for the branch and occupational employment, two different males and females distribution trends by occupational and branch groups are inherent for both these structures. The following trend takes place for the branch structure: the females number within the "female" branches as compared to the males number within the "male" branches is much lesser. And it is vice versa for the occupational: the females number within the "female" branches as compared to the males number within the "male" branches is higher.

Fig. 6. Occupational segregation dynamics 1994-2001 (ID, WE and MM)

Thirdly, most likely the 1998 crisis affected the changes within the employment branch structure, but left almost untouched the occupational structure by kinds of activity consolidated groups. The MM index various trends testify this. If the 1998 branch segregation MM index value was maximal (a small "peak" was observed), the MM index change trend for occupational segregation measurement was not affected by the 1998.

A conclusion may be made that the most important factor affecting the segregation degree in future is not the fact if the females' shift to such traditionally "male" sectors as the manufacturing and extractive industries will happen, but if the male share increase within the services sector will take place. The trends in this direction that have started to show are not stable yet.

Thus the gender wage gap analysis has shown that the occupational segregation brings in a stable contribution to the pay gap. At the same time the segregation indices analysis shows that on the whole its level stays stable enough. If the Goskomstat data on the late 1990s gender wage gap increase is taken as the basis, then how can this be explained? May be the gender wage gap increase took place due to gap increase in the wages medium levels of "male" and "female" kinds of occupations. I.e. the "male" kinds of occupations become more profitable and the "female" ones become less profitable. At that it should be taken into account that even in the "female" kinds of occupation males as a rule occupy higher positions.

Segregation is stably connected to wage gaps. The higher the female share within the branch labour force, the less the wages relation to the economy wages average level. Only two branches stay outside of this stable dependence: Agriculture and Finances, Credit, Insurance. Mostly males are occupied in Agriculture, but the wages there is very low, in Finances, Credit and Insurance females are occupied more, but the wages there is very high as compared to the average level. At the same time in the financial sector the male occupation has been growing all last time. This illustrates well the gender inequality forming mechanism on the labour market, how the males and females distribution by the kinds of activity leads to different economic results for them.

Average month wage rate
(sector / all economy)

Average month wage rate
(sector / all economy)

As soon as the branch or occupation due to reasons connected to favourable state of the market becomes profitable, male labour force starts to flow into it. On the one side the employers give them a higher preference, on the other side the more profitable branches offer higher requirements to the labour loads which are not always can be born by females due to a greater range of family duties than males have. Behavioural and situational patterns work An example of the same redistribution mechanisms operation in the reverse direction is the increase of female occupation in the army within the military personnel occupational group. As soon as the military activity has become low profitable and less attractive to males a demand for female labour force started to form there.

3.5. Discrimination, behavioural and situational patterns

Apart from the problems connected to the gender segregation, the females labour market position is affected by discrimination on the part of the employer.

Discrimination means inequality in possibilities on the labour market for the workers marked out by a certain sign and having equal with the other workers capacity (group discrimination), or inequality in possibilities for individual workers as compared to the workers having similar labour capacity characteristics (individual discrimination).

According to the definition worded by ILO in the Convention 111 «About Discrimination in Work and Occupation Area», discrimination means "any distinction non-admission or preference carried out according to race signs, skin colour, sex, religion, political views, foreign origin, or social origin leading to Inequality in possibilities or treatment abolition or violation in work and occupation area". Any difference, non-admittance or preference in relation to a certain type of work based on its specific requirements is not considered discrimination.

It is possible to mark out several types of discrimination on the labour market as to the incidence and results.

1. Discrimination at employment (or, vice versa, at dismissal). It happens when one or the other population group is employed last and dismissed the first other things being equal.

2. Discrimination in access to certain professions or positions. It occurs when a certain population group is forbidden or limited in access to certain kinds of activity, occupations, positions, in spite of the fact that they are capable of fulfilling these kinds of work.

3. Discrimination at remuneration of labour. It appears at lower labour remuneration for some workers as compared to the others for one and the same work fulfilling. I.e. in case when the wages gap is not connected with the difference in labour efficiency.

4. Discrimination in career development, getting a higher position. It is observed when the workers of the discriminated group are limited in vertical mobility.

5. Discrimination at getting of education or professional training. It may occur in limiting of access to getting of education and professional training or rendering of lower quality educational services. This type of discrimination cannot be fully ascribed to discrimination on the labour market as getting of education usually precede the labour activity. But in spite of the "pre-labour" nature of this discrimination type, its causes and effects are closely connected to the labour market functioning.

Multiple researches both on the part of the workers and on the employers' part show that the most actual type of discrimination on the Russian labour market is the employment and dismissal discrimination.

Thus according to the RLMS data in 2000 most females and males shared the position that males have better chances at employment.

Fig. 8. Employers’ occupational gender preferences in Male hiring

Fig. 9. Employers’ occupational gender preferences in Female hiring

A research carried out in 1997 through 2001showed that up to 30% of vacancy advertisements were not genderwise neutral.¹⁵ At that this did not concern the occupations where professional skills connected to the male and female labour force biological differences quality were required. Within four years the share of such advertisements increased to 40%, in spite of the fact that the Russian Law forbids gender discrimination employment. The gender preferences distribution by the occupation groups shows that the employers have stable patterns on male and female occupational preferability.

So at the labour market a hidden and not open discrimination exists, which is revealed through the employment and advance policy and reflects the gender preferences of the employers regarding working places and kinds of activity. Such hidden discrimination contributes to horizontal and vertical segregation at the labour market.

Speaking about discrimination at the labour market two types of patterns supporting the gender inequality may be marked out: behavioural and situational patterns.

Situational patterns are employer's patterns. An employer perceives females as labour force less useful. He originates from the idea that a female must combine the labour activity with her household duties and therefore working extra efforts carrier growth orientation etc. can be expected from her to a lesser extent. Such behaviour of an employer is no doubt discriminational.

Behavioural pattern is vice versa a worker's pattern. As the females know that they are treated as less preferable workers they originate from the idea that they cannot compete with males and choose the types of activity requiring less labour efforts.

Thus according to the RLMS data more than half of the females believe that they do not have enough qualities valued in the existing economic situation.

As to the males, their appraisals were more optimistic. On the average there were 10% less males thinking themselves to lack valuable qualities than females believing themselves lacking valuable qualities. The reverse trend is observed when adequacy of qualities evaluation is involved. In this case, on the contrary, there are 10% more males. On the average during these years about 43% of males thought they had many qualities which were valued at that moment on the labour market (the answers " it's rather not about me" or "it's sure not about me"). In 1998, the crisis year, the males share having checked these variants of answers decreased to 39.7%.

Thus on the labour market both discrimination and female self-selecting mechanism operate simultaneously and they do not permit females occupy status equal to males.

Wide females involvement in the labour activities has not led to males and females employment gap abolishment. At quantitatively close labour force participation rate in the labour force of males and females, similar kind of labour activity the females within their labour cycle keep working in conditions of horizontal and vertical segregation on the labour market and get lesser wages on the average. So, providing of equal participation in the labour force is not enough for removing the basis of gender inequality. To achieve this it is necessary that demand structure on the labour market and personnel employment and advancement be changed, increased meaning and prestigiousness of the positions occupied by females.