Dmitry Poletaev: Up to 50% of Migrants in Russia Are Illegal

Almost two years have passed since Eurasian Economic Union started functioning, which allows drawing certain conclusions. Dmitry Poletaev, Director at the Center for Migration Studies, shared his opinion on the changes in the area of migration during this period with RIAC editing team.

Almost two years have passed since Eurasian Economic Union started functioning, which allows drawing certain conclusions. Dmitry Poletaev, Director at the Center for Migration Studies, shared his opinion on the changes in the area of migration during this period with RIAC editing team.

In your opinion, how has the EAEU establishment benefitted countries benefitted the migrants from the Union’s countries? Has their position changed for the better?

Migrants from Kyrgyzstan were among the first to feel positive changes: now they do not have to obtain patents allowing to work in Russia. I recently conducted a survey, and half of the respondents noted that finding a job became easier – the employers are more willing to hire the Kyrgyz. As far as Tajik and Uzbek migrants are concerned, there may appear certain nuances that supervising structures can promptly uncover. Now the Kyrgyz do not have to pay annually about 1000 US dollars as a patent charge, which allows them to dump the cost of their services. It does not always happen, but other things being equal, they may agree to lower wages.

Has the situation with migrants changed significantly for Russia over the past two years, or the dynamics has remained the same?

Of course, the number of migrants has declined, but a part of them simply work without papers. Recently the number of jobs and, accordingly, the workers has reduced. This is a common misconception not only in Russia, but also abroad, that setting up additional administrative barriers will result in restricting the migrant flow. In reality, migrants simply find roundabout ways. In Russia, the number of migrants who do not have the necessary set of documents can reach up to 40-50%.

When we talk about the situation in Russia, it is necessary to understand that the unemployment has a structural nature. Local residents are not ready to occupy the jobs taken by migrants even in times of crisis.

Dmitry Poletaev

Are there any significant imperfections in the EAEU legislative framework related to regulating migration issues?

Unfortunately, quite a few issues remain unsettled, including pension payment in the first place. Russians go to work in Kazakhstan, Belarus, and Kyrgyzstan. When they retire, their savings should be transparent, but so far, this problem has not been resolved.

Health care is a very important issue for the Kyrgyz. Those who apply for a patent get the medical insurance that covers only minimum services. The health insurance system that covers serious illnesses is non-existent. Migrants save on their health. Those Kyrgyz, who now do not get a patent, should buy insurance on their own. Not all of them do so; they do not attend regular medical examination and, accordingly, increase the risk of infecting others. This may bring about a very difficult epidemiological situation, and it is necessary to introduce special measures to make migrants obtain health insurance. Such measures should be taken at the federal level.

What actions should Russia take to maximize utility of free movement of labor?

Firstly, we need to harmonize the member-states’ legislation. Secondly, the issue of Russian citizenship appears to be the pressing matter of the day: citizens of EAEU member-states often apply for Russian citizenship to avoid the need of obtaining documents required for employment. That is, they use Russian passports not to stay, assimilate and become part of the Russian society, but as a pass to the medical institution. Again, according to recent studies, 60 per cent of the Tajiks and the Kyrgyz, who wish to obtain Russian citizenship, submit an application for this very reason. Only a little more than a quarter of respondents really intend to stay in Russia. In my view, it's pretty sad, because citizenship as such loses its value. One reason for this phenomenon is the inadequate use of such an instrument as the temporary residence status. The Green Card format is widely used in the United States. It seems appropriate to take advantage of this format within the framework of the Eurasian Union. Its member-states fear that their best citizens will move to more developed countries and change their citizenship, leaving their less developed home countries with nothing. The point is that, as a rule, it is the best, in a determinate sense, and the most active people who leave the country, since they go the length of getting the Russian citizenship, which is not at all easy. This represents an unspoken conflict between the countries that no one needs amidst integration processes underway.

Interviewed by Maria Smekalova, RIAC Website Editor