The article presents in-depth study of the legislative logic and trends that have recently developed in Russian law in regard to foreign workers and teleworkers, both as separate categories and when these two characteristics meet in one person. The study gives a short introduction into the history of the phenomenon and formation of the terminology in this field and outlines recent amendments to the Labor Code of the Russian Federation in regard to these categories of employees, pointing out the deficiencies of new provisions and approaches and describing the legal consequences they entail. It is demonstrated that several important issues were omitted (or forgotten) in the process of drafting and that the previous rigid approach still persists in the Code. The study then addresses the omitted aspects of current telework regulation in Russia and suggests amending the Code with particular provisions introducing the principles of localization of the place of work and procedures for remote employment of foreign citizens and stateless persons, as well as provisions that would help teleworkers actively participate in collective labor relations and fully enjoy those trade union rights that they have been formally given. In the authors' opinion, the main problem with the current telework legislation is discrepancies and lacunae in the legal definitions of the core concepts in this field. These deficiencies may be attributed to the relatively recent appearance of telework in the Russian labor market. Consequently, the legislature has not yet acquired the experience to see all the significant aspects of this mode of work and regulate it adequately. At the same time, article regards the current situation positively enough to hope that the suggestions, ideas and approaches that they have considered in this paper will be used in the development of the Russian legislation in the field.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Герасимова et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: