I will note right away: the migrants themselves are of the opposite opinion. I think you have noticed how much the number of female migrants has grown in the last two years. And if a man has brought his woman to another country, he is clearly not planning to return to his native village. Again, walk through Moscow's McDonald's: almost every second worker there is a boy or girl from Central Asia. After all, children did not overcome the thousands of kilometers separating Dushanbe and Moscow on their own — their parents summoned them. And if a man has brought his woman and his child to him, then he is no longer a migrant, but an immigrant. He is here permanently.
The list of professions for immigrants is also expanding: now they not only dig pits, but also serve food in restaurants and cafes, sell tickets at cinemas, and even collect money from those wishing to use a street toilet of the outhouse type.
Sociology reveals such a pattern: you begin to notice that there are too many foreign faces on the streets when the number of foreigners reaches seven percent. For huge Moscow with its approximately fifteen million, these seven irritating percent give a million. A million immigrants from Central Asia. And in total, the capital has about six million jobs. With this in mind, it can be stated that, at least in the capital region, immigrants from Central Asia (and there are also Moldovans, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Georgians, Armenians, Azerbaijanis…) influence the labor market to a fairly high degree. Even if in its lowest segment of unskilled labor. Is this good or bad? After all, for us – the skilled labor – a Tajik with a broom does not seem to interfere at all. But let's look at this from a different angle.
How much does a highly skilled worker in China earn – say, a operator of a Japanese CNC machine, whose labor productivity differs little from that of his colleague in the USA? That's right. At best, as much as a Mexican janitor cleaning the street where the American worker lives earns for his labor. Why? Not only because China is a significantly cheaper country than the USA. And not due to high competition. It's all about the low cost of labor of those who work in areas that do not require high qualifications. Simply put, the labor of a highly skilled Chinese worker is much cheaper than it could be, because the Chinese janitor earns a pittance. Unconvincing, isn't it?
Imagine a situation where a janitor earns 25 thousand rubles. And a person with a technical education, who was then trained directly in production for more than one year, earns 30 thousand. Incredible? That's right. The point is that there should be a large gap in pay between skilled and unskilled labor. Otherwise, the worker loses motivation to study, which takes more than one year and without which high qualifications cannot be obtained. Moreover, if a janitor's labor costs 5 thousand a month, few employers will be willing to pay 50 thousand for skilled labor in industry. Even 30 thousand with great difficulty.
And so we come to a paradoxical conclusion: one of the systemic tools for increasing the wages of highly qualified personnel is the growth of wages in professions that do not require skilled labor. The question: what stands in the way of implementing such a policy? That's right – unskilled labor migration from other countries.
Always and everywhere there is a certain percentage of people who have no desire/ability to engage in work requiring qualifications, who do not want to spend years obtaining qualifications. At the same time, these people have a certain view of the amount of remuneration they would like to receive for their unskilled labor. Let's say it's 25 thousand rubles a month. For this money, a Muscovite would be ready to go work as a janitor – but all the janitor positions are already occupied by migrants who receive 15 thousand for their labor.
What does the Muscovite do? He somehow goes on welfare, deciding for himself that it is better to do nothing for 5 thousand than to work five days a week for 15 thousand. Then such a person with a high probability becomes an alcoholic or – what is worse – tries to get money through petty crime. The result for the economy: the real wage of the migrant is 20 thousand rubles. The result for society: the country has gained one more lumpen.
Let's increase the janitor's salary to 25 thousand rubles. Real cost – 5 thousand. A person, instead of becoming an alcoholic, works. For just 5 thousand rubles, we get a citizen, not a lumpen. A working person, not a street brawler or worse – a drug dealer.
Maxim AVVERBUKH,
Itogi.