No abstract

Introduction: the article deals with the problem of violence in the workplace or in another place where the employee performs their labor duties. Statistics show that a significant number of people suffer from violence at work in both Russia and Kazakhstan. The problem of sexual harassment, if considered as a narrower part of the phenomenon of violence in the world of work, is becoming ‘visible’ in the countries of the post-Soviet space, especially in connection with the numerous statements of women who have reported harassment at work. The purpose of our study is to find legal solutions for those who have been subjected to violence and harassment at work since the greatest difficulties for them are: fear of stigmatization, the difficulty of recognizing violence and harassment on the part of colleagues and managers as ‘inappropriate’ behavior, the choice of the form of behavior for both the victim and the employer in a situation where violence has occurred, as well as the process of proving the fact of psychological or physical violence in conjunction with the necessity to expose the specified facts of private life for general discussion. Methods: empirical methods of comparison, description; theoretical methods of formal and dialectical logic; special scientific methods such as the comparative legal method and the method of interpretation of legal norms. Results: we have shown that the legislation and practice of Russia and Kazakhstan in the field of protection from violence and harassment at work are not in complete conformity with international labor standards; formulated some proposals concerning available legal mechanisms to be used for the development of legislation aiming to ensure the protection of workers from violence and harassment. Conclusions: the labor legislation of Russia and Kazakhstan does not protect workers from violence and harassment at work, however, there are attempts made at the level of the executive branch to regulate the problem in a recommendatory manner. Practice shows that employers and employees seek dialogue on this sensitive issue. Judicial practice in Russia and Kazakhstan testifies to the low awareness among judges of the issues concerning protection of workers from such forms of violence as oppression, victimization, mobbing, and harassment

No abstract

This article examines the policy of limiting the powers and resources assigned to the labour inspectorate in ten post-USSR republics: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. This policy is pursued in all ten countries in the name of boosting economic efficiency and reducing regulatory constraints on business. A significant number of limitations on labour inspections is identified, some of them in direct contradiction with the requirements of the priority International Labour Organisation (ILO) Conventions on Labour Inspections, No. 81 and 129. Some of the restrictions do not directly contradict the requirements of these Conventions, but their inadequate application in combination with certain restrictive measures leads to significant non-compliance with international labour standards. It is argued that international institutions such as the World Bank and the International Finance Corporation (IFC) have advocated this decline in inspections. The most significant restrictions on labour inspections in the region include limiting inspections to occupational safety and health matters; the legal requirement for labour inspectors to give prior warning to employers about the inspection, or to obtain approval for the inspection from other state authorities; and the requirement for a complaint to be made by workers as a necessary precondition for carrying out an inspection. Labour Legislation, International Labour Law, Labour Inspection, Law Enforcement, Post-Soviet Countries, Compliance, Occupational Safety and Health