3.4 Labor Exploitation and Other Abuses

While trafficking and forced labor are particularly severe abuses, employers in Russia routinely violate migrant workers' labor rights in other ways. Some employers use violence or threats of violence against workers. Migrant workers also frequently experience several types of labor rights violations, often several at once. These include employers' refusal to provide contracts, unpaid or delayed wages, excessively long working hours, and unsafe working conditions. Russia has signed a number of ILO conventions and international treaties that obligate it to ensure basic labor protections for all workers. 

Some employers use violence or threats to retaliate against workers, often against workers who protest against wage or other violations. International human rights law guarantees the security of person and the right to be free from cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment. International human rights law provides protection in absolute terms against such abuse by state authorities, but also creates the positive obligation to investigate all allegations of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by public and private parties, and to identify and punish those responsible. [142]

As will be described more fully in subsequent chapters, there are few accessible avenues for redress available for migrant workers, and employers who deny workers legal contracts, withhold wages, force employees to work long hours, fail to provide safe working conditions or commit other abuses are largely able to do so with impunity. The Russian government should more rigorously investigate and prosecute employers responsible for abusive practices and should make available effective avenues for redress available for all victims of labor violations and physical violence, irrespective of victims' migration or contractual status.

International Legal Standards

The International Labour Organization (ILO) has developed a comprehensive body of conventions that address virtually every aspect of workers' rights. Russia has ratified all eight of the core ILO conventions, including the two ILO conventions prohibiting forced labor (Nos. 29 and 105), two ILO conventions ensuring freedom of association and the right to organize and bargain collectively (Nos. 87 and 98), the ILO Convention concerning Discrimination in Employment and Occupation (No. 111) and the Convention on Equal Remuneration (No.100), which prohibit discrimination in the workplace. [143] Russia has also ratified ILO Convention on the Protection of Wages (No. 95), which guarantees regular payment of wages, and the ILO Convention on Occupational Safety and Health (No. 155), which calls for policies to prevent accidents and injuries to health, effective enforcement of laws and regulations concerning occupational safety and health, and for the government to publish annually information on accidents and other work-related health concerns. [144] Despite these ratifications, migrant workers in Russia very often do not receive the basic protections enshrined in these legal obligations.

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) recognizes "the right of everyone to the enjoyment of just and favourable conditions of work." [145] Such conditions must ensure: remuneration, safe and healthy working conditions, equal opportunity for promotion, as well as rest, reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay, and remuneration for public holidays. [146] The ICESCR also guarantees "the right of everyone to form trade unions and join the trade union of his choice…" and the right to strike. [147] The ICCPR also guarantees freedom of association and the right to form and join trade unions. [148] As described above and below, migrant workers in Russia regularly do not enjoy these conditions and are limited in their ability to participate in unions and strikes.

Russia has signed, but not ratified, the revised European Social Charter, which sets out rights concerning conditions at work in some detail. [149] As a signatory it is required not to take any action that would defeat the object and purpose of the treaty. [150]

Regarding non-citizens' rights at work, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination's General Recommendation No. 30 states that once an employment relationship has been initiated and until it is terminated, all individuals, even those without work permits, are entitled to the enjoyment of labor and employment rights. [151] This recommendation is relevant for migrant workers in Russia, insofar as many of them work without valid work permits, either because they were not able to obtain work permits due to expired quotas or excessive delays in processing work permits or, very often, as a result of employers' refusal to provide written employment contracts (in Russian, trudovoi dogovor). Employment contracts are necessary for the worker's employment and residency status to remain regular, as well as for the worker to access particular avenues for redress, as described in the next section.

Failure to Provide Contracts

"It's very hard to work without a contract. Every minute you expect they will cheat you and throw you out."

-Nurbek N., migrant worker, Bishkek, March 27, 2008

Both private and state employers, including brigadiers and other intermediaries who act as employers, routinely fail to provide migrant workers with written contracts [trudovoi dogovor] as required under Russian law. [152] Elena Tyuryurkanova, an expert on migration in Russia, told Human Rights Watch that her research has determined that 77 percent of migrant workers do not have contracts. [153] As a result, even when migrants themselves have complied with relevant laws by registering on the migration registry and obtaining a work permit, they quickly find themselves in violation of both migration and labor laws. Without an employment contract, a migrant worker is not legally employed, and, because he or she is not officially employed, his or her legal right to stay in Russia cannot be legally extended and expires 90 days after entry into Russia. In the absence of a contract, employers do not fulfill other legal obligations vis-à-vis their employees: they pay workers in cash and do not pay employment or social taxes.

Without an employment contract, workers also have great difficulty proving employer relations before a court. The worker will face almost insurmountable obstacles should they seek redress for abuses or resolve a dispute with an employer. Furthermore, as described below, the Federal Work and Employment Service (Rostrud) conducts full investigations into allegations of labor violations only in cases when the worker is in possession of a written employment contract or, in the absence of a contract, in the unlikely event that an employer admits that the worker is employed as a regular employee, albeit illegally. Finally, because the absence of a contract renders a migrant worker's stay in Russia illegal after 90 days, he or she risks fines and possible deportation should he approach the authorities with a complaint. The Russian government should ensure sufficient oversight of employers to ensure consistent provision of written employment contracts to migrant workers. The government should also investigate fully all allegations of abuse, irrespective of workers' migration or employment status.

The majority of the migrant workers interviewed by Human Rights Watch who had worked in Russia since 2007 stated that they had received residency registration and obtained a work permit, either on their own or through intermediaries, yet in almost all but a few cases, the migrants had not been offered any type of written contract by an employer. Of 146 migrants whom Human Rights Watch interviewed, only 22 stated that they had signed a written contract with their employer. The very few employers who did provide contracts to workers interviewed by Human Rights Watch in most cases did not provide workers with a copy of the contract, or did not abide by the terms of the contract. Experts believe that in most cases, even when employment contracts are issued, they are not in compliance with the law and therefore have no legal standing. [154]  

The failure to provide contracts is so widespread that migrant workers have no effective options of seeking alternative employment with an employer who will provide a contract. Few migrants are aware that the law requires employers to provide contracts and in any case do not expect contracts or believe that they will serve any purpose.

Emil E., a foreman from Kyrgyzstan working for a construction company in Moscow for one and a half years, told Human Rights Watch that he is responsible for helping find workers for various construction projects. He told Human Rights Watch, "All [foreign workers] and Russians outside of Moscow work without labor contracts. Only Moscow residents get them." [155] Of the 25 people working in his team, nine had contracts and received official salaries, with all relevant tax deductions. The migrant workers from other parts of Russia and from Central Asia, including Emil E. himself, have no contracts and received cash payments. [156] Soli S., a 23 year-old worker from Tajikistan who worked on different sited in Russia, stated, "I worked on various construction projects for an Italian firm. I didn't have a contract. They didn't offer and I didn't ask." [157]

Some workers believed that asking for a contract was futile and might even hinder their ability to get hired. Sobir S., also 23 and from Tajikistan, was recruited by a relative who is a brigadier to work in Moscow doing odd jobs on a construction site. When asked if he had obtained a contract from the brigadier or from the construction company overseeing the work, he replied, "I didn't have any kind of contract, and I didn't ask [for one]. I know that for us those kinds of conditions aren't available." [158] Ravshan R., from Khujand, Tajikistan, told Human Rights Watch that he does not have a contract at his current job and that he doesn't expect to get one. "If we demand contracts, nobody will hire us," he said. [159]

Even in cases when migrant workers do secure written contracts from their employers, the employer does not necessarily respect the terms of the contract. Nor does the existence of a written contract mean that the employer will abide by all relevant laws. Zakirullo Z., a 34-year-old man from Tajikistan working in construction in Moscow, told Human Rights Watch, "According to the contract, our work day is 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. but we [actually] work 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. … The contract says [we work] five days, and we work six days. The contract says 65 rubles (US$2.75) per hour, but we generally get paid depending on the volume completed, not the time, and we learn how much we've earned only when we receive our money. We never know in advance." [160] According to Eldiyar E., who worked in Barnaul, in Siberia, "In 2007, [my employer and I] concluded a written agreement, and the owner of the company paid some taxes, but I don't know how much. I still received my salary in cash and did not sign anything confirming payment." [161]

As noted above, some migrant workers do have contracts with their employers. For example, Subhiddin S., from Tajikistan, works seasonally for a construction firm building private houses in Moscow and has a written contract with his employer of two years. He earns 15,000 rubles (US$633) per month, and his employer pays official taxes. [162]

Employers in Russia routinely conclude agreements with false salary information apparently in order to avoid paying taxes on the full salary. This practice leaves workers vulnerable to exploitation because should they need to sue for non-payment of promised wages, only the sum indicated in the contract might be recovered. For example, Zhenish Zh., from Bishkek, told Human Rights Watch, "Our boss signed a contract with us. The contract listed a salary of 6,525 rubles (US$276), but we had agreed on a salary of 30,000 rubles (US$1,267). We didn't ask why the official salary was so little. We still don't know … maybe they write a minimal salary to avoid paying taxes. We didn't even have any doubts about it or thoughts that something might not be right. " [163]  

Many migrants expressed doubt about the value of signing contracts in any case, apparently owing to a distrust of the legal system. Zhenish Zh. from Bishkek told Human Rights Watch, "A contract-it's just a piece of paper." [164] Another migrant worker shared this pessimism about the efficacy of employment contracts as a means of defending their rights vis-à-vis their employers: "Written agreement or not, I know one thing: we are different. Russian laws do not protect us." [165]

Unpaid Wages, Delayed Wages, and Illegal Deductions in Wages

By far the most widespread violation of migrant workers' rights is the failure by private and state employers, including brigadiers, or by persons acting as intermediaries, to pay workers fully and promptly. Migrant workers are frequently faced with situations that lack any predictability about wages. They do not know when they will be paid, how much they will be paid, or even if they will be paid. In cases when employers do not pay wages at all, many workers feel they have no choice but to remain at a job for weeks or months in hopes of one day receiving all or some of the wages owed to them. There is a common practice among employers, foremen or brigadiers of withholding wages for a month, apparently as a coercive measure to ensure workers stay at the job in hopes of eventually receiving payment.

When migrant workers leave an employer engaged in this kind of practice, they usually do not receive the last month's wages. Many workers leave jobs after receiving only part of their salary or after receiving nothing at all, either because they are resigned to accepting the situation or in some cases because employers threaten violence or denunciation to the authorities, as described below (see Threats and use of violence by employers). Officials at the Tajikistan Embassy in Moscow stated that they receive approximately three to four citizens per day stating that they had not received their wages and that non-payment in these cases totaled over 300 million rubles (US$12,666,000) in the first five months of 2008. [166]

Russian law requires that salaries be paid at least twice a month. [167] Under the Russian criminal code it is a crime, punishable by fines as well as a possible prison term, to withhold wages for more than two months. [168]

Some employers also impose unexpected deductions from workers' salaries, whereby the employer reduces the wages owed for alleged violations such as poor work product or damage to equipment. Employers may also take deductions from wages for food or other expenses incurred on behalf of the worker, although usually the worker is not informed about these deductions in advance.

Under Russian law, employers have the right to make salary deductions, in certain instances. [169] Some of the deductions reported by migrant workers documented in this report may have been legal. However, because employers have hired migrant workers without providing them with contracts, workers have difficulty proving employment relations before a court a law and thus have few legal options to challenge these deductions or seek redress from wage-related violations.

Unpaid wages

In some cases labor migrants could say with certainty that it was their employers who failed to pay them. For example, Musafirbek M., a 21-year-old man from Uzbekistan, had been working with a group of nine other Uzbeks building fences in the outskirts of Moscow for an employer who refused to pay them. He told Human Rights Watch, "[The employer] promised to pay 12,000 per month (US$459), and to pay weekly. We had an oral agreement. For two months he has not paid us. He promised to pay me, but I am not sure he will. He already owes me so much money… I don't know what to do." [170] Ravshan R., 32, from Tajikistan, said that he worked for four months at a construction site building cottages in the village of Kotovo in Volgograd province in central Russia without getting paid. "In March [2008] we started demanding from [the foreman] that he pay us. We were always told us to wait. We only received [money] for food," he told Human Rights Watch. [171]

Tohir T., a 30-year-old worker from Tajikistan described his experience working in Ivanovka, near Tambov in Orenburg oblast, on a hotel construction site during the winter of 2006-2007. "I worked for three months and 10 days and was owed US$500, but they only paid us US$300 for two months and for the rest of the work they didn't pay us at all. … It was pointless to complain. We simply took what they gave us and left." [172] Almazbek A., a 19-year-old construction worker who had been working for six months in Zvenigorod in Moscow oblast told Human Rights Watch, "[We] had an oral agreement with our employer that [our brigade] should receive 150,000 rubles (US$6,333) per floor that we completed. We have completed three floors, but we have not received any money. There were originally 13 people in our brigade, but half of them have left." [173]

Very often brigadiers or middlemen are responsible for non-payment of salaries. This may be because, in some cases, the brigadiers or middlemen themselves are cheated by the contracting or subcontracting firms. In other cases, brigadiers and middlemen are absconding with the workers' salaries themselves. Akmal A., a welder from Uzbekistan building private cottages in the suburbs of Moscow, told Human Rights Watch, "For the moment three months of my salary has not been paid, but I am waiting for it. We never had an agreement with the contractor directly, it is always [done] through middlemen." [174] One 47-year-old construction worker told Human Rights Watch, "At one job I was promised 5,000 rubles (US$211) to dig a trench and do some other work. But I only got half. This job was through a middleman. I tried to get money from him. I called many times but he didn't answer. This happens all the time. They will give you half of what is promised and the other half they keep." [175]

Bolot B., a 21-year-old plasterer who worked in Russia for a year and a half told Human Rights Watch,

I worked in a brigade with other Kyrgyz. The brigadier promised us 20,000 rubles (US$844), then paid us less. I got only 20,000 rubles every three months. Where could I complain? The Kyrgyz promised that everything would be fine. I never saw the director of the [construction] company, only the Kyrgyz middlemen. They said, 'If you have complaints, you can go work somewhere else.'"[176]

Ulugbek U. from Kokand, Uzbekistan, similarly stated, "I worked for Agrostroi in Moscow for six months [in 2006], and they did not pay me for the last two [months]. The brigadier said that the company had not paid him [and so he could not pay us]." [177]

In many cases, and particularly on large construction sites or projects, workers often have little knowledge of the individuals and entities participating in a complex chain of contracting that can include multiple subcontractors and a general contractor all hired by the individual or entity commissioning the construction. In most cases workers hired through middlemen or brigadiers and even brigadiers themselves never have contact with the actual company ordering the construction. Brigades or individual workers are often hired by subcontractors, who have been hired either by other subcontractors or a general contracting firm. In the case of non-payment by a brigadier or middleman, the worker's lack of information makes it difficult for him or her to seek recourse, including possible indemnity, with other subcontractors, contractors, or the commissioning entity for failure to pay wages or any other violations. 

Aziz A., 27, from Kyrgyzstan told Human Rights Watch that he and four others were doing construction in Moscow, and the middleman gave them only 15 percent of the payment originally agreed on. They decided to quit and felt it futile to complain anywhere. He said, "A court wouldn't even look at the case. We don't know who the actual owner [of the building] is." [178]

Unlike many other labor migrants interviewed who were cheated out of wages, Emomali E., a 26-year-old worker from Ganchi, Tajikistan, could identify the firm overseeing the construction site he worked on, and confronted the director. Emomali E. told Human Rights Watch, "For three months I worked at one construction site. We had an agreement to be paid for each floor [completed]. They paid us for the first floor, but didn't pay us for the second one. I got this job through a middleman. … I went to the director of the construction firm to demand the money owed to me but he just said, 'I don't know you. I am seeing you for the first time. I don't believe you work for me.'" [179] Because Emomali E. worked for a subcontractor of this construction firm and had no contract to prove his employment, he could not prove to the director that he worked on that firm's sites.

Grisha G., a brigadier from Dushanbe, Tajikistan stated that he and 63 other workers on a construction site in Ekaterinburg did not get paid the three million rubles (US$126,660) owed to his brigade for two months of work. When Grisha G. confronted the company that ordered the construction, the director stated that he had paid the contractor. The head of the firm claimed that he had paid the subcontractor, who happened to be his brother. The subcontractor had disappeared altogether. According to Gosha G., none of the workers ever got paid for their work. [180]

Azamat A. is a brigadier from Kyrgyzstan who oversaw a brigade working on a large construction project at a university in Moscow. Azamat A.'s brigade of about 40 people and several other brigades worked for almost three months from June-September 2007 doing interior finishing work. Although the director of the subcontracting firm overseeing the project his brigade was working on promised to pay them for every 100 square meters completed, she did not pay regularly, claiming that the general contractor had not paid her. Azamat A. told Human Rights Watch, "Many workers left when they were not paid, but we needed to get paid, so we stayed on and continued to work." The subcontractor then promised to pay one large sum after completion of the work and the opening of the university. Even after completing the work Azamat A. and other brigadiers continued to live on the site for about three months, hoping to receive payment owed to them. In December 2007, Azamat A. finally gave up waiting and went home to Kyrgyzstan; the subcontractor still owes him and his brigade some one million rubles (US$42,220). [181] Notably, although Azamat A. and his team had work permits, the director of the subcontracting firm convinced him that "no documents were needed for the job" and therefore did not provide them with contracts that might have helped them appeal to a court to recover the unpaid wages.

Delays in wages

Regularly withholding some or all of a salary for an extra month is a common practice that workers feel compelled to accept. A foreman from Ukraine confirmed that the construction firm he works for in Moscow pays workers "badly." He explained that workers receive their first pay only two months after beginning work, and said that this system was common on construction sites. [182] A 47-year-old welder from Tajikistan with nine children told Human Rights Watch, "There are delays in paying our salaries. For December, I only got paid at the end of January. But at least they always pay." [183] Naimjon N., a 21-year-old worker from Uzbekistan, arrived in St. Petersburg in February 2008 to work on construction sites. He said that the company he works for pays regularly, but with a one month delay. If he leaves the job, he will not get the last month's salary. [184] An Armenian lathe worker told Human Rights Watch, "I tried to work with some commercial companies before. You get the job, you do it, but you only get 50 percent [of your wages]. The other 50 percent will be paid next month. They do this to make sure you don't quit." [185] A brigadier with eight years of experience working in Moscow confirmed this practice, telling Human Rights Watch, "Sometimes companies withhold wages to make sure that people come back." [186]               

Deductions in wages

Employers often take unexpected deductions from wages for arranging residency registration or work permits for employees, for housing or for food, or as a form of punishment for alleged mistakes in the work or for taking days off. Uktam U., a worker from Tajikistan, told Human Rights Watch, "Our boss got me the registration and work permit, and deducted US$200 from my salary the first month." [187] Naimjon N., who worked on construction sites in St. Petersburg said that his employer simply refused to pay workers for 45 days in exchange for organizing the worker's work permit, thereby effectively deducting a month and a half's salary from the worker. [188]

In several interviews workers stated that while employers did provide housing and food for them, they deducted this from the salary. Navruz N. told Human Rights Watch, "We were working Universtroi in Moscow in 2007. The company provided housing, but they deducted 1,500 rubles (US$63) per month for it." [189] A worker in St. Petersburg stated that the employer deducted 2,000 rubles (US$84) from his salary for a room in a dormitory which he shared with six other workers. [190] Firuz F., a 47 year-old worker said that his employer takes 1,200 rubles (US$51) per month for food, which consists only of kasha and soup, and no meat. [191]

Edil E., a 47 year-old construction worker told Human Rights Watch that he worked on a construction site carrying 50 kilogram bags of concrete and sand up three flights of stairs. His employer would fine workers 10 percent of their monthly wage of 20,000 for missing one day of work. "We worked every day from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. and sometimes they forced us to work until 10 p.m.," he said. "But, if we missed one day they would deduct 2,000 rubles (US$84) from our salary as a fine." [192] According to Zufar Z., "[Our boss] would check everything … and if there was anything that was not perfect there would be a deduction from our salary. If something had to be re-done and it would take half a day, he would deduct 2,000-3,000 rubles (US$84-127). At his next job, Aziz A. said that, while his employer paid regularly every 10 days, the foreman complained on several occasions that Aziz A. and the six others in his brigade had not laid tiles properly, and so deducted 5, 10, or 30 percent from their salaries, which Aziz A. did not consider fair. [193] One worker from Uzbekistan, Ulugbek U., who on one worksite did not receive his salary, as described above, faced a different problem on a new worksite, this time in the form of illegal deductions. "We worked by volume. They paid me 11,000 rubles (US$464) in April, but I should have received 20,000 rubles (US$844)," he said. "The company claimed that we had not done it properly and broke some equipment." [194]

Konstantin K., a foreman from Ukraine working in Moscow told Human Rights Watch that he could "justify any deductions from salaries if needed." [195] Konstantin K. issued deductions from workers' salary most frequently due to problems in quality, noting that the worker "should be very careful," but acknowledging that "sometimes in fact the material is bad, and this affects the quality." Deductions can also be taken for failing to observe technical rules or for not finishing the work on time. [196]

Long Working Hours

"There is no such thing as a 'working day,' there is only 'this [work] has to be finished.'" [197]

-Zufar Z., a construction worker from Kyrgyzstan

Under Russian law, normal working hours are not to exceed 40 hours per week, except in certain circumstances, when workers should be paid overtime. Workers should have at least one day off per week, as well as non-working holidays and paid vacation time. [198] However, many migrant workers interviewed by Human Rights Watch spoke of long working hours, with few or no days off and no paid vacation or holidays. In some cases, employers forced workers to work long hours, threatening to fire them if they refused. Employers may also pressure workers to work long hours or overnight, claiming that certain material will go bad or wages will only be received for work completed urgently. However, since very often migrant workers earned hourly wages or were paid according to the number of projects completed or volume of work completed, many migrants claimed to voluntarily work long hours. Most employers granted Sundays off. One expert in migration in Russia stated that her research has revealed that the average work week for migrant workers is 60 hours. [199]

Zufar Z. told Human Rights Watch that where he worked laying tiles in construction sites in Tver, "There is no such thing as a 'working day,' there is only 'this [work] has to be finished." We slept at the site where we worked. We would wake at 5 a.m. work until lunch, eat instant soup for lunch, and then work again until [very late]." [200]   Musojon M., from Uzbekistan, who is 29 years old and had been working for four years in Russia, described the long hours at a major construction company, "We worked day and night, from 8 a.m. to 10 or 11 p.m. Sometimes we had to stay until 3 a.m. We were forced to work this late. In the last seven months I have had two days off." He also had not received salary for three of the seven months he worked. [201]

Substandard Living Conditions

Migrant workers' living conditions in Russia vary widely. Most workers interviewed by Human Rights Watch arranged their own accommodations, which were often poor due to insufficient income or a desire to economize and have more money to take or send home. Many workers are promised housing and three meals per day as part of the conditions of work as described to them by brigadiers, employment agencies, or other intermediaries. Upon arrival, many, although not all, workers find that the employer provides only sub-standard living conditions. Workers are often forced to accept poor conditions because their employers, brigadier, or intermediary insists on it, because it is the least expensive option, or owing to the difficulties of arranging alternative housing independently.

Employer-provided housing is most often in transport containers or trailers kept on the worksite, or in the actual buildings being constructed or renovated. Workers interviewed by Human Rights Watch lived in the buildings they are constructing, in unrenovated basements and in tents or make-shift housing in the woods. These accommodations generally lack proper sanitary conditions, and workers in most cases did not have access to hot water or bathing facilities. Employers may also provide food to those living on the worksites but it is often of poor nutritional quality or in insufficient amounts. Some employers promise to provide additional money for food, but do not always live up to this commitment.

Workers are frequently required to live in transport trailers set up on worksites. Zhenish Zh., a 30-year-old construction worker from Bishkek, went to Irkutsk in May 2008. He told Human Rights Watch, "We lived in a trailer, without a toilet… We didn't even ask about the living conditions … We knew the guy [proposing the work] was from Kyrgyzstan, we didn't stress about it. Our neighbor reassured us, but, really, it was living like the homeless do. There were four of us, two bunk beds, a heating plate and a television. Can you believe it, for two months and nine days there I didn't wash at all!" [202] Ravshan R., a 32-year-old worker from Tajikistan, said that he began working at a site building cottages in a village in the Orlovsk oblast, in December 2007. His employer provided a trailer for him to live in together with about 10 other workers. Although they had one heater, it would get cold at night and they were not allowed to turn on a second heater. There was no hot water available to them and no shower. Only after two months of work was the group of workers put on a bus and taken to a bathhouse. They received two eggs for breakfast and soup with cabbage or buckwheat for lunch and dinner. [203]

Often workers are required to live in make-shift accommodations in the buildings which they are constructing. Aziz A., from Kyrgyzstan, said that when he worked on a construction site in Moscow in 2007, he and the other members of his brigade lived in one room on the third floor of the unfinished building they were constructing. "There were no proper conditions," he said. "We could only get water in the basement. A normal person wouldn't live like that. But we came here to work and not live. For us all that mattered was finishing the job." [204]

Akmurad A., a 27 year-old worker doing finishing work in Krasanoyarsk said, "We lived on the work site but there were no proper conditions. We made a make-shift plumbing ourselves and sort of built a room for ourselves. Once, in April 2006, they left us with no food for four days. They did not bring us our salary for the work we had completed or money for food as they had promised … and for four days we really had nothing." [205] Human Rights Watch interviewed 19-year-old Almazbek A. at a construction site in Zvenigorod where he had been working, unpaid, for six months. As promised, the employer provided housing and food, but the food was limited to pasta and buckwheat. When Almazbek A. and others asked for other food, their employer told them, "Eat this, or you can eat on the street." [206]

Worksite  Accidents

Human Rights Watch documented a number of accidents involving migrant workers on construction sites in Russia. Little data is available on construction site accidents, although many employers in the construction sector are reported to not enforce safety standards rigorously, and accidents, including fatal accidents, are not uncommon. According to Rostrud, there were 1,076 fatal accidents on construction sites in 2007. [207] Many are never investigated. One manager at a major Western company ordering construction of large buildings throughout Russia, told Human Rights Watch that he believed there were 20 to 30 accidental deaths from June 2007 to June 2008 on his company's construction sites. [208]

Russian labor law details numerous requirements for employers in the event of an accident involving a worker with an employment contract. In cases of accidents involving more than two people, serious accidents, or accidents resulting in a death, the employer must notify several government agencies, including the labor inspectorate, prosecutor's office, and local government. It is further obligated to form a three-sided commission, involving workers, employer representatives, and trade union representatives, to investigate the accident. [209] For workers with retainer contracts (in Russian, grazhdansko-pravovoi dogovor, the typical legal document for services, contractual work, etc.) or no contracts whatsoever, a worksite accident would be governed not by labor law, but by civil and criminal obligations. [210]

Under Russian labor law, workers have the right to safe working conditions and mandatory state social insurance for accidents and work-related illnesses, based on employer social tax contributions. [211] Under law, employers should provide all workers, regardless of citizenship, with an insurance policy that allows the worker to receive services from a medical clinic according to the location of the workers' registration document. [212]

Because most migrant workers do not have employment contracts and their employers are not making contributions to the state social fund that provides compensation for accidents and do not provide migrant workers with insurance policies, workers may have difficulty paying for any necessary medical treatment for work-related accidents. Under a Commonwealth of Independent States agreement, emergency medical treatment should be free to all CIS citizens in Russia. [213] However, migrants interviewed by Human Rights Watch stated that they were frequently required to pay for emergency medical treatment, as well as for non-emergency treatment. 

While some workers reported that their companies ensured that injured workers received medical treatment or compensation for their injuries, in many cases employers did not provide any assistance to workers. Experts noted that in case of accidents or any medical service needs, migrant workers simply go to their employers, possibly making the employee more dependent on the employer, who acts as the sole provider of basic social services. [214]

It is not within the scope of this report to detail safety requirements for all types of work on construction sites, but the cases of accidents documented by Human Rights Watch indicate poor safety standards at the worksites in question. According to one foreman from Ukraine working in a private firm in Moscow:

Nobody teaches safety at the workplace. I'm supposed to provide safety instructions for the workers. There is a book where I should note that it was done. While you are working on the main part of the building, you remember about it. Then you just forget, and I don't have time to do it. The main safety directions are: 'You're responsible for your own ass,' and 'Work with your eyes open.'[215]

Zhenish Zh., a 27-year-old construction worker doing façade work on new buildings in Irkutsk, told Human Rights Watch, "We [regularly] worked on a height of four meters, without any safety harness, naturally." [216]

Interviewees told Human Rights Watch about accidents they themselves had had or that they had witnessed. Evgenii E., a foreman from Belarus working at a construction company in Moscow, described his own accident: "I fell down from the seventeenth floor. … I had a safety belt and a helmet, [but] the scaffold was not well secured and it broke." Evgenii E. managed to save himself by catching hold of the scaffold on the eighth floor. Nevertheless he broke several ribs. [217]

Vladimir V., a 27-year-old welder from Kyrgyzstan told Human Rights Watch that while he was working on private houses outside of Moscow, twice he fell from a height of about two meters. During one fall, his side caught on a protruding nail, and he was wounded in the abdomen. He and his co-workers treated the wound themselves, because, Vladimir V., said, "To go to a doctor is expensive. I didn't have any insurance. They told [my boss] to take me to the doctor, but it didn't do any good." [218] Vladimir V. also was twice burned in the face because he was forced to work for one month with an inadequate welder's mask. Once he was burned in the eye because he was working at a height and unable to wear a mask at all, since he had to use the hand that would normally support a mask to keep himself from falling. [219]

Some interviewees described accidents that they had witnessed. Bolot B., who worked as a plasterer in Russia for one and a half years, told Human Rights Watch,

I saw one Kyrgyz guy about 25 years old, was working on the 24th floor. He did not have a safety belt. He fell and he died. His relatives came and collected his body. I don't think the company paid him any money. His sister was talking in front of me to someone from the company, she was crying, and the man just told her, 'We don't have money now, will give it to you later.'[220]

 

Akmurad A. from Osh told Human Rights Watch that an employer he worked for a construction site in Krasnoyarsk pressured workers to sign statements that they would not hold the employer responsible in the case of an accident. Akmurad A. then described two accidents involving Uzbek workers on this worksite. In one case, according to Akmurad A., "A welder named Zokir fell down from the third floor. He [had not been given] a safety belt. He was working on the facade, … and he fell. He fell on his left side, suffered a concussion, and a broken left leg." Akmurad A. learned from Zokir that the employer did not help him with his medical costs. [221] In a second case on the same worksite Akmurad A. learned from his co-workers that a young man fell asleep near machinery and suffered damage to his hand and arm after his sleeve got caught in the machinery. The man's friends each gave him money to help him pay for medical treatment, but the company did not pay. [222]

Nurbek N., a construction worker from Kyrgyzstan, learned from a friend about an accident involving his friend's brother. "The brother of a friend of mine was working in construction. He fell and hurt his hip. [The employer] kicked him out, [saying] they didn't need him anymore." According to Nurbek N.'s friend, there was no compensation from the employer. [223] Ruslan R., who was working in Moscow, stated, "One of my co-workers fell from the second floor. We did not bring him to the hospital since he didn't have a residency registration … I sold my [mobile] phone for 7,000 rubles [and we sent him home]." [224]

According to a former manager at a Turkish construction company, one of the largest general contracting firms working in Russia, during construction on one site in 2007, seven workers, four from Turkey and three from Tajikistan, died. Local authorities arrived after two hours to investigate, and the company was required only to present to the authorities the safety instructions issued to workers in order to demonstrate that the deaths had been accidental. No further investigation was conducted. The construction company paid compensation to the families. [225]  

Threats and Use of Violence by Employers

"Get out of here as fast as you can, or I will call my guys and they will beat you up." [226]

-Employer's response when Akmurad A., a migrant worker from Kyrgyzstan, requested money owed to him.

Employers may threaten or use violence to intimidate workers who take action such as protesting against non-payment of wages or attempt to exercise their right to strike. Employers or their representatives, such as foremen, have threatened or beat workers themselves or have threatened or instructed construction site guards, police, or hired thugs to beat workers. Employers also threatened to denounce workers who did not have residency registration or work permits to the police.

One Kyrgyz migrant worker working as a brigadier at a large construction site in Krasnoyarsk told Human Rights Watch about an attempt by several brigadiers and workers to organize a strike in response to the company's failure to pay wages:

The brigadiers gathered that day and decided to strike. It was August 30, 2006. We… came to the foreman ... He said, 'You'll get your money on December 31…' He called the guards. They started to beat one worker from Samarkand [Uzbekistan] in front of us. We all went back to our work places, and gave some medical assistance to the beaten guy ourselves. We could not bring him to the hospital as he did not have a residency registration.[227]

In another case, a migrant worker described threats from his employer when he and several others attempted to strike:

We were building two-storey cottages. In the beginning, the general director…, told us that he will pay us weekly, then promised to pay every fifteen days. [But] we were not paid in full. … We said that we will start a strike, since we were not paid at all for three weeks. They tried to beat me and my brother, but some of the other workers protected us. ... The foreman said, 'I will call the guards and they will throw you out of here, just throw you into the garbage.'[228]

Vladimir V., a 27 year-old construction worker from Bishkek, was doing finishing work on private houses in Moscow in July 2007 when his employer refused to pay him the full amount Vladimir V. believed was owed to him. Vladimir V. stopped working and demanded US$400 and the employer threatened him saying, "If you aren't going to work, then go dig yourself a grave. Russia is big, there are lots of forests, and no one will find any trace of you," and "If you don't listen to me, I'll make you work for me for free." [229] Out of fear, Vladimir V. and a fellow worker left their employer without collecting the money owed to them. Vladimir V. hitchhiked 1,000 kilometers to his brother's house in Volgograd where he waited until his wife was able to send him money to buy a return ticket to Kyrgyzstan. [230]  

In one case documented by Human Rights Watch, an employer beat and held captive one worker from Uzbekistan, apparently in an attempt to extort money from the man and his family over a dispute at work. Khakimjon Kh., a 50-year-old construction worker, arrived in Moscow on May 16, 2008, and began work on a construction site in Moscow oblast. The employer confiscated his documents, claiming to be arranging his residency registration and work permit. A few weeks after he began working together with three others renovating a sauna and a car repair shop, the employer claimed that the workers had not laid a concrete foundation properly, and demanded that they pay for it. However, the workers did not have the money readily available, and the employer began beating Khakimjon Kh. and the other men working with him. The three men then fled, but the employer locked Khakimjon Kh. in a garage for three days, giving him only bread and water and giving him a phone from time to time demanding that he call home to force his relatives to send money. [231]

While captive in the garage, Khakimjon Kh. made contact with some people standing outside, who called the police. When the police came, however, they told Khakimjon Kh. to "deal with it yourself," and left him in the garage. He was eventually able to phone an Uzbek friend in Moscow, who contacted the organized crime unit. This time, when the police arrived, they secured his release. The police rescue of Khakimjon Kh. is notable, as in many instances police are themselves likely to abuse migrants. Khakimjon Kh. believes the prosecutor's office opened an investigation into the incident. [232]

Nurmakhmad N., a 25-year-old construction worker, told Human Rights Watch that during the summer of 2007 he and three other workers agreed with a private home owner in the Istrinskii raion north east of Moscow to construct drainage on the man's property for a fee of US$1,200. Nurmakhmad N. and the others worked for 10 days, but on completion of the job, the property owner claimed that the water would not run in the drainage, and paid only US$200. [When we complained] he started to say, 'I am going to call the cops now.' And our guys didn't have registration. We just left, or else he would call the cops…. Just so there wouldn't be any kind of conflict." [233]

Zhenish Zh. and a friend, both from Bishkek, went to work on a construction site in Irkutsk after a neighbor proposed they work for his friend, Slavik. Although as described in other sections of this report, the employer provided poor living conditions, signed an illegal contract with Zhenish Zh., and refused to pay them according to their oral agreement, Zhenish Zh. continued to work for Slavik for two months. When at the end of the second month Slavik still was not paying salaries in full, Zhenish Zh. and his friend confronted Slavik, and the discussion became heated. Zhenish Zh. remembers: "Slavik started to call some tough guys he knew. Four Russian guys who worked for him came. One of them … yelled at us, 'You are foreigners here. You think you can dictate here? Go back home. You are nothing here!' And then Slavik yelled at us, 'I am going to take you to the woods and bury you!" Zhenish Zh. and his friend fled and then hitchhiked from Irkutsk to Bishkek. [234]