April 28, 2023 - 10:11am
Along with tanks and men, it appears that Russia’s war in Ukraine has decimated another of its resources — the labour force. This month Russian state news agency TASS revealed that the number of workers under 35 is at its lowest share of the labour market since the early 1990s, with the most significant decrease in 2022 amongst those aged between 25 and 29.
The cause of this decline is easy to ascertain — Putin’s “special military operation” has taken young men from their offices and factories and placed them on the front line. Russia’s Federal Statistics Service has suggested there was a net increase in the military last year of approximately 400,000 after 300,000 reservists were called up in September’s partial mobilisation. The Kremlin is now seeking a further 400,000 recruits through a tightening of conscription laws and a propaganda campaign urging young men to sign up.
Besides Russia’s war casualties, which are subject to dispute, TASS complained of the loss of “young specialists”, the war in Ukraine having exacerbated Russia’s long-term “brain drain”. Up to one million Russian citizens, predominantly young men, have fled the country to avoid the draft or in protest at the war, usually from among the highly educated professionals the country can least afford to lose.
Over 10% of the country’s tech workforce left in 2022, while businesses have been further hit by an exodus of migrant workers fearful of being corralled into Russia’s military operation. In all, economist Vladimir Gimpelson estimates that emigration and mobilisation cost the Russian workforce approximately 2% of male workers aged 20-49 last year.
The loss of skilled workers can be expected to increase thanks to the actions of the Russian Government. A bill to raise the age of conscription from 18-27 to 21-30, as well as recruitment officers pressuring students to join the war effort, means that graduates could walk out of the classroom and straight into the line of fire.
So what does this diminishing workforce mean for Russia? Regarding the economic consequences, CEO of strategic consultants Macro Advisory Chris Weafer told Newsweek that the shortages of labour and skills will be “as damaging for Russia’s future economic growth prospects as the sanctions ban on technology”. The ratio of vacancies per jobseeker increased over the course of 2022 from 2.1 in the first quarter to 2.5 in the last, while half of businesses complained of staff shortages last year. A sluggish economy combined with employers trying to lure workers with higher wages risks fuelling inflation and, in December, Central Bank Governor Elvira Nabiullina warned that “the capacity to expand production in the Russian economy is largely limited by the labour market conditions”.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeYep we keep hearing the Russian supporters talk about their endless reserves of manpower without appreciating the consequences.
Of related interest is the fact so many fled to places like Kazakhstan, Georgia, Azerbaijan etc, States Putin previously viewed almost as vassals. And these places have willingly provided sanctuary. Furthermore earlier this week Azerbaijan did a major deal with EU states to double gas exports at the expense of Russian suppliers. Putin in no position now to have the Tanks roll eastwards to stop that and the reality of how he’s weakened himself and his Country a slow burn but inexorable.
Right, with 80% of the Russian Army firmly embedded in the tar baby that is Ukraine, none of their other neighbors need to fear an attack. They can thumb their noses at Putin with impunity.
Right, with 80% of the Russian Army firmly embedded in the tar baby that is Ukraine, none of their other neighbors need to fear an attack. They can thumb their noses at Putin with impunity.
Yep we keep hearing the Russian supporters talk about their endless reserves of manpower without appreciating the consequences.
Of related interest is the fact so many fled to places like Kazakhstan, Georgia, Azerbaijan etc, States Putin previously viewed almost as vassals. And these places have willingly provided sanctuary. Furthermore earlier this week Azerbaijan did a major deal with EU states to double gas exports at the expense of Russian suppliers. Putin in no position now to have the Tanks roll eastwards to stop that and the reality of how he’s weakened himself and his Country a slow burn but inexorable.
No surprises here. Entirely predictable. Talented people always vote with their feet. Unless you build a Berlin Wall. They’re leaving a basket case behind.
No surprises here. Entirely predictable. Talented people always vote with their feet. Unless you build a Berlin Wall. They’re leaving a basket case behind.
Let alone the Jewish emigration that has doubled since the beginning of the war. Add to that the desastrous life expectancy, expecially in men.
I quote the exiled chiel Rabbi Goldschmidt who said “I think it’s safe to say that a great percentage of the creacle, the creative class of business and cultural leaders, intellectuals and artists, have left Russia, which is and will be very detrimental to Russian society.”
Let alone the Jewish emigration that has doubled since the beginning of the war. Add to that the desastrous life expectancy, expecially in men.
I quote the exiled chiel Rabbi Goldschmidt who said “I think it’s safe to say that a great percentage of the creacle, the creative class of business and cultural leaders, intellectuals and artists, have left Russia, which is and will be very detrimental to Russian society.”
Just another result of Putin’s planning for a short war–and getting sucked into an endless meat grinder.
At least over the winter, Russia was pursuing a cruel, if potentially effective strategy: destroy the power grid, so Ukrainians would freeze, and supposedly leave the country.
But the the latest attacks in Uman, Zaporizhia and Kyiv only speak of mindless desperation, a la Germany in 1944. Too weak and ineffective to attack military targets, the Russian military now goes for civilians.
And everyone knows that D-Day is coming…
Just another result of Putin’s planning for a short war–and getting sucked into an endless meat grinder.
At least over the winter, Russia was pursuing a cruel, if potentially effective strategy: destroy the power grid, so Ukrainians would freeze, and supposedly leave the country.
But the the latest attacks in Uman, Zaporizhia and Kyiv only speak of mindless desperation, a la Germany in 1944. Too weak and ineffective to attack military targets, the Russian military now goes for civilians.
And everyone knows that D-Day is coming…
The trends the article describes seem plausible. But Russia’s disastrous weakening has been announced before. And here they still are. War economies did not implode early on in the past. Germany’s industrial war machine was fully operational until 1918 and well into the end of 1944. Those wars were not decided in the factory halls…
You couldn’t be more wrong. WWI and WWII were largely decided by industrial production and logistics. The Soviet Union massively outproduced Germany in tanks. The US ramped from very low production to massive output – enough to supply the UK (tanks) and Soviet Union (trucks) as well as themselves. The Germans didn’t get serious about production until 1943.
Germany was almost starving in 1918. They were on the verge of collapse at the end of 1918. People just like to pretend they weren’t. Check the history.
The trends aren’t “plausible”. They’re facts. Even the Russians have admitted it. No need to stay in denial on this.
Also assumes Putin could brutalise his own people in the way Stalin did in order to get them to fight. Would just hasten his own demise.
What is more important is how resources are used. The four massive battleships, Bismarck, etc had a combined weight of about 120,000 T . If that steel and manpower had been used to make 1000T ocean going U- Boats pre 1939 , Germany could have won WW2. Tiger Tanks were superb but building cheaper Panzer Mk IV with 75mm guns which were lighter and easier to maintain would have made better use of the resources.
It was the whole command system designed by Dowding which enabled efficient use of fighters in the Battle of Britain.
Russia appears to have ignored the development in hand held anti tank missiles such as the NLAWS to which their T80s and T90s are vulnerable.
A cheap longbow wielded by an archer brought down an expensively trained and armoured knight on a horse.
The war industry did collapse in the end. No doubt. They did loose the war from all perspectives. But only after a long time. And first when they were running out of soldiers.
Also assumes Putin could brutalise his own people in the way Stalin did in order to get them to fight. Would just hasten his own demise.
What is more important is how resources are used. The four massive battleships, Bismarck, etc had a combined weight of about 120,000 T . If that steel and manpower had been used to make 1000T ocean going U- Boats pre 1939 , Germany could have won WW2. Tiger Tanks were superb but building cheaper Panzer Mk IV with 75mm guns which were lighter and easier to maintain would have made better use of the resources.
It was the whole command system designed by Dowding which enabled efficient use of fighters in the Battle of Britain.
Russia appears to have ignored the development in hand held anti tank missiles such as the NLAWS to which their T80s and T90s are vulnerable.
A cheap longbow wielded by an archer brought down an expensively trained and armoured knight on a horse.
The war industry did collapse in the end. No doubt. They did loose the war from all perspectives. But only after a long time. And first when they were running out of soldiers.
A large factor in the Germans losing the Battle of Britain was the fact the UK was churning out Hurricanes and Spitfires at almost double the rate the Germans could knock up a Messerschmitt
You couldn’t be more wrong. WWI and WWII were largely decided by industrial production and logistics. The Soviet Union massively outproduced Germany in tanks. The US ramped from very low production to massive output – enough to supply the UK (tanks) and Soviet Union (trucks) as well as themselves. The Germans didn’t get serious about production until 1943.
Germany was almost starving in 1918. They were on the verge of collapse at the end of 1918. People just like to pretend they weren’t. Check the history.
The trends aren’t “plausible”. They’re facts. Even the Russians have admitted it. No need to stay in denial on this.
A large factor in the Germans losing the Battle of Britain was the fact the UK was churning out Hurricanes and Spitfires at almost double the rate the Germans could knock up a Messerschmitt
The trends the article describes seem plausible. But Russia’s disastrous weakening has been announced before. And here they still are. War economies did not implode early on in the past. Germany’s industrial war machine was fully operational until 1918 and well into the end of 1944. Those wars were not decided in the factory halls…
There are so many conflicting claims about reasons for certain outcomes that who knows what the truth is.
We were told that recruitment of soldiers was mostly from unemployed in poor regions.
So why would it effect workforce in any big way?
Mass emigration would, of course.
The figures quoted look way off.
If there was loss of 1 mln to migration and 400k to army recruitment then how can it be only 2% of male workers of 20-49 cohort?
That would mean that this cohort was 70mln.
I thought whole population of Russia was circa 150mln?
I did a double-take when I read ‘2%’. The percentage doesn’t look right.
Agree but not as far out as you suggest. According to stats there are 7.5 million Russian men in the 20-29 year bracket as of 2022.
Figures are obviously difficult to come by. I understood it was estimated to be about 700,000 ( the article says upto 1 million ) who left and remember they weren’t all men nor necessarily in that age bracket.
All the numbers are a bit “woolly”. Note TASS is a government outlet, was talking about under 35s and talking about the workforce. Matching up the numbers would be difficult – it’s the “direction of travel” that’s important.
I did a double-take when I read ‘2%’. The percentage doesn’t look right.
Agree but not as far out as you suggest. According to stats there are 7.5 million Russian men in the 20-29 year bracket as of 2022.
Figures are obviously difficult to come by. I understood it was estimated to be about 700,000 ( the article says upto 1 million ) who left and remember they weren’t all men nor necessarily in that age bracket.
All the numbers are a bit “woolly”. Note TASS is a government outlet, was talking about under 35s and talking about the workforce. Matching up the numbers would be difficult – it’s the “direction of travel” that’s important.
There are so many conflicting claims about reasons for certain outcomes that who knows what the truth is.
We were told that recruitment of soldiers was mostly from unemployed in poor regions.
So why would it effect workforce in any big way?
Mass emigration would, of course.
The figures quoted look way off.
If there was loss of 1 mln to migration and 400k to army recruitment then how can it be only 2% of male workers of 20-49 cohort?
That would mean that this cohort was 70mln.
I thought whole population of Russia was circa 150mln?