Key words: labor protection, priority functions of social policy, employment program, social development programs, social and labor rights, corporate social policy, triune social policy.

One of the main tools for implementing the principles of the welfare state is social policy. Different countries choose different models of social policy. If a country has declared itself a social state, then it is obliged to choose a model of social policy that is focused on strengthening the principles of a social state, and the leading role in its formation and implementation should belong to the state. “The relationship between the social state and its social policy is manifested in how fully and deeply the social state pursues its social policy, to what extent this policy expresses the needs and interests of its citizens” (Averin A.N. Social policy of the state. - P. 17) .

In the systematization of the principles of the social state and their implementation, programs for the social development of the country, as well as its regions, developed and implemented at all three levels, play a large role.

The structure of social policy considers three levels: federal, regional, municipal. Most issues of the development of education, healthcare, culture, housing and communal services and consumer services for the population should be resolved at the level of state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments. All three levels are in continuous interaction, interdependent and form an inextricable unity. Therefore, social policy, which already at the stage of formation represents a tripartite process of developing mutually agreed upon principles for solving social problems, is usually called a triune social policy. The implementation of such a policy through the development and implementation of social development programs is also carried out at all three levels, which represent an integral system.

IN programs social development, goals and their quantitative and qualitative characteristics are determined for each sector of the social sphere. The objects of such programs are economic, legal, cultural, demographic, national-ethnic and other aspects of the development of the social sphere at the appropriate level. These programs contribute to the implementation of the following basic principles of social policy:

Ensuring that citizens are provided with social rights guaranteed by the constitution;

Creating conditions that provide citizens with opportunities to improve their standard of living through their own efforts and means;

The targeting of social assistance is the provision of such assistance to citizens (families) who, for objective reasons, do not have sufficient income and property capable of generating income;

Coordination of interests of generations (See: Social State: A Brief Dictionary-Reference Book. - P. 394.);

Social policy in a number of countries is based on the principles of corporatism.

Thus, countries such as Germany, Sweden, and Japan achieved success at the end of the 20th century. largely due to the use of corporatist principles. Naturally, they were transformed into them in different ways, taking into account the historical and natural-economic features of the development of these countries. Corporatism, based on “order and organization,” in Germany differs from corporatism in Japan, which is based on the “Japanese spirit” and the mentality of its people. Nevertheless, all of these are various modifications of corporate relations. The latter reduce the level of confrontation (struggle) inherent in an unregulated market economy, because The key element is not the struggle, but the protection of one’s socio-economic interests. Corporate potential has enormous potential and, if used rationally, can provide a significant synergistic effect, which concerns not so much the economy as the social sphere. This process can be considered as a special social transformation leading to the creation of a modern complex system of relations that meets the principles of an open market socially oriented economy, an increase in the number of firms and corporations that pay great attention to the social problems of their employees in the formation of corporate culture. For example, firms' spending on social programs in France is approximately 33 francs. for 100 francs salary, in the company Procter&Gamble - up to 50-52 francs for 100 francs salaries."

The functioning of production organizations is associated with the interaction of two components: means of production and labor. Within the framework of the social policy of industrial organizations, the quality of work is directly related to meeting the diverse needs of enterprise employees. Quantitative and qualitative indicators of the implementation of the social policy of enterprises represent the most important organizational value of the overall plan.

In addition to the general values ​​that determine the functioning of production organizations, there is also a whole set of intra-organizational values: functional and structural order, labor behavior of workers, including their observance of technological discipline. Diligence, a high sense of responsibility for the fulfillment of one’s professional and status responsibilities are, as it were, integrating qualities of a production organization. But organizations have a need to introduce innovations, to change their structure, technologies, relationships, and functions. Innovation, initiative, and creative inclinations also, to a certain extent, represent intra-organizational values.

The values ​​of enterprises, which objectively arise from the conditions for carrying out entrepreneurial activities, are an integral part of the culture of enterprises. However, each enterprise has its own modifications of these values. The ability of an enterprise to create key values ​​that will unite the efforts of all structures of an enterprise, according to T. Peters and F. Waterman, is one of the deepest sources of enterprise prosperity.

Corporatism is a person’s natural desire to satisfy his interests with the assistance of other people, not at their expense, but with their help and support, while giving his contribution to others, through the development of an interacting community. If we take into account that life in society takes place within the framework of at least two groups of relationships that develop between people: socio-economic, which are based on property relations, and organizational-economic, associated with the real interaction of people in the field of organizing activities and production, methods of their regulation, management, then corporate relations can be considered both as one of the components of organizational and economic relations of a market economy, and as a way (method) of regulating joint activities. Each country has its own modification of socio-economic development, which differs not only in tools and mechanisms, but, above all, in the level of efficiency of their functioning. And the emergence of the concepts “Swedish model”, “Japanese model”, “American model” is due to the formation of certain systems of socio-economic relations in individual states within the framework of the formation of world market relations.

The role and place of trade unions in participation in the development and implementation of social policy. Historically, trade unions have always played and now play an important role in the development and implementation of social policy, realizing their functions: representative, protective, managerial and control. In 1993, when discussing the draft Constitution of Russia, trade unions, relying on science, had a decisive influence on the choice of the model for building the Russian state as a social one, the economic basis of which should be socially oriented production aimed at providing the material basis for a decent life for all citizens.

All subsequent activities of trade unions show that they remained the only public organization that permeates all levels and spheres of the system of bodies, where socio-economic decisions are developed and adopted, where the social policy of the state is determined and implemented. And today, during the period of overcoming the crisis in the country, we can rightfully say that trade unions were able to resist many of the destructive processes of the so-called reforms and prevent mass unemployment: with a decline of 50% in production, the number of unemployed in the country as a whole was 6%. This is also a lot, but without the opposition of trade unions, the outbreak of mass unemployment could lead to deskilling of workers, the complete destruction of the main productive force, and this is an irreversible process and a catastrophe that would take decades to eliminate. And this is not the only example of the impact of trade unions on the social life of the country.

In order to have a real legal basis in the new socio-economic conditions for participation in defending the rights and interests of workers and their families, trade unions, as before, relying on the scientific potential of the Academy of Labor and Social Relations, defended the Federal Law “On Trade Unions and Their Rights” and guarantees of activity”, a whole series of norms that provide the opportunity to influence state social policy. There are thirteen basic rights of trade unions. Their implementation determines the role and place of trade unions in participation in the development and implementation of social policy. First of all, trade unions are called upon to make full use of their right to representation and protection of the social and labor rights and interests of workers, which is again confirmed by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, which entered into force in February 2002.

It is known that the sphere of social policy is the policy of incomes, including wages. The law on trade unions states that remuneration systems, forms of material incentives, tariff rates (salaries), as well as labor standards are established by employers and their associations in agreement with the relevant trade union bodies and are enshrined in collective agreements or agreements. But the law provided trade unions with another important channel for exercising their active role in the field of social policy: the right to make proposals for the adoption by relevant government bodies of laws and other regulatory legal acts relating to the social and labor sphere. In addition, trade unions must demand that draft laws, regulations, orders affecting the social and labor rights of workers are not adopted by state authorities or local governments without taking into account the opinion of the relevant trade union.

An important area of ​​social policy is ensuring employment. Trade unions, using their right to promote employment, do a lot: they take part in the development of employment programs, offer measures for the social protection of trade union members released as a result of the reorganization or liquidation of the organization, and carry out trade union control over compliance with employment legislation. They can submit proposals for consideration by local government bodies to postpone the deadlines or the time of termination of the implementation of measures related to the mass release of workers, strictly ensure that there are no illegal job cuts, and that employment contracts with employees are not terminated on the initiative of employers without the prior consent of the trade union body . Trade unions also have practical opportunities to influence other areas of social policy through the mechanism of collective bargaining agreements. Their task is to ensure that the sections of the collective agreement contain all areas and directions of social policy.

In relation to such an area as insurance, trade unions have equal rights with other social partners to parity participation in the management of state social insurance funds, health insurance, pension funds, etc., formed from insurance contributions, as well as the right to trade union control over use of these funds. Here it becomes possible to defend the necessary funds for health-improving activities for trade union members through the system of sanatorium-resort treatment, recreational facilities, tourism, mass physical culture and sports.

One of the important areas of social policy is solving problems in the field of labor protection and the environment. Here, trade unions also have their own opportunities for active influence. They have the right to participate in the formation of programs on issues of labor protection and the environment, in the development of regulatory legal and other acts regulating issues of labor protection, occupational diseases and environmental safety.

1. Why is social policy the main instrument for establishing the principles of a welfare state in practice?

2. What is the difference in social development programs at the federal, regional and local (municipal) levels?

3. What are the priority functions that are put forward in social development programs and the implementation of social policy?

4. How do trade unions participate in solving social and labor problems?

3.3. Social partnership in a social state

Key words: international labor organization, Russian model of social partnership, Russian tripartite commission for regulating social and labor relations, system of social partnership, social partnership, tripatism.

Social partnership is a system of relations between employees and employers with the intermediary role of the state. It includes a system of institutions, mechanisms and procedures designed to maintain a balance of interests of the parties involved in negotiations on employment, pay and working conditions, and to facilitate the achievement of a mutually acceptable compromise for the sake of achieving both corporate and general social goals. “The social significance of social partnership is determined by the breadth of its scope. Since this type of relationship is primarily between employees and employers, the main area of ​​its functioning is social and labor relations. This area also includes economic and political relations related to social, labor” (Kiselev V.N. Social partnership // Social partnership. Dictionary-reference book. - P. 229).

One of the foundations for the emergence and condition for the further development of social partnership was the creation in 1919 of the International Labor Organization (ILO). The social partnership system actively began to develop after the Second World War, when the labor and trade union movement became a real force in industrialized capitalist countries. With the active role of the state in most European countries, national socio-economic councils were created from representatives of associations of entrepreneurs, trade unions and the state (and Italy - the National Council of Labor Economics; in Belgium - the Central Economic Council, and then the National Labor Council; in Holland - the Economic and Social council, later - the Labor Council; in France and England - the Economic and Social Committee). Nowadays social partnership is most developed in Germany, Austria, Sweden, and to a lesser extent in the USA, Japan, Italy, Greece and Portugal. The scientific and technological revolution gave a powerful stimulus to the development of the ideology of social partnership. The phenomenon of social partnership, which has now received legal recognition mainly through labor law norms, in an expanded sense can be considered as the most acceptable form of interaction in the information society, as an instrument of state social policy, a way to solve social problems in conditions of political and civil freedoms in the social market economy.

Social partnership in Russia today is considered, on the one hand, as a system of relationships between employees and employers, and in a broader sense - as one of the ways to represent the interests of any social groups in society. The noted system of relationships can be built effectively only in the presence of a third active subject of social partnership - the state, and thus social partnership turns into one of the principles of the state. IN In a social state, this principle is one of the main grounds for strengthening “sociality”. On the other hand, social partnership means a way of reconciling opposing interests, a method of solving socio-economic problems and regulating conflicts between employees and owners. Social partnership, with this understanding, acts as an alternative to social confrontation, as a way of coordinating the interests of various social groups, used in the process of resolving contradictions and conflicts.

Despite the fact that supporters of various directions recognize the need for the existence of social partnership, they define the nature of this phenomenon differently. However, these two approaches are by no means mutually exclusive: on the one hand, social partnership is a system of relationships between the parties, and on the other, the principle on which these relationships are built, that is, these are two complementary conditions for the existence of a social partnership system.

F.I. Gainullina identifies three main models of social partnership: American, based on the general legal consciousness and goodwill of the parties, where there is no system for concluding tripartite agreements as such, but the institution of arbitration of labor disputes is widely developed; Scandinavian, based on extensive legislation in the field of regulation of social and labor relations, where there are permanent bodies of social partnership, and the state system of arbitration and resolution of labor disputes plays a big role; European, characterized by the presence of social partnership bodies at different levels, which are primarily engaged in “preventive” work that does not allow disagreements to lead to serious conflicts (See: Gainulnna F. Tripartism: world and domestic experience // Man and Labor. 1997. - No. 11. - P. 95).

According to the role of subjects of the collective agreement process, V.G. Smolkov distinguishes conciliatory model (the state, employers and trade unions participate in the collective agreement process), pluralistic model(decentralized collective agreement processes are carried out at the enterprise level), model of individualization of labor relations ( See: Smolkov V.G. Models of social partnership // Socio-political journal. - 1998. - No. 5. - P. 156-163).

Russian model of a social partnership system(The social state: A brief dictionary reference book. - pp. 164-167.) (French modele - measures, sample) involves the implementation of the goals, objectives and principles of social partnership in Russia on the basis of global patterns, international norms and rules for the development of social partnership, taking into account features of the mentality of Russian society, historical traditions and development trends, the specifics of the country's transition to market relations.

The process of establishing social partnership institutions in Russia is associated with the beginning of reform of the Russian economy. The stimulus for this process was the rise in strike activity in 1989-1992. The nationwide crisis led to the beginning of the formation of a multi-level system focused on the principles of tripartite interaction (tripartism) in the regulation of social and labor relations. Government bodies, together with trade unions and employers, have developed formal agreement procedures - general agreements, sectoral (tariff) agreements, collective agreements. A series of consultations of representatives of trade unions and employers' associations took place, and as a result, in November 1991, the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation “On social partnership and resolution of labor disputes (conflicts)” was issued. Thus, the Russian system of social partnership was created.

The Russian model of social partnership includes: a set of bodies formed from representatives of workers, employers, and executive authorities in order to regulate social and labor relations at various levels; a set of agreements and contracts concluded by these bodies; the appropriate order, relationship, interaction of these bodies and their agreements and contracts.

The Russian model of social partnership, being in its infancy, is being formed using the world's positive experience in regulating social and labor relations on the principles of tripartism and the actual domestic experience of social partnership relations. For example, its specificity, in particular, is the mandatory direct participation of executive authorities and local self-government in concluding agreements at all levels on the regulation of social and labor relations; the system of agreements concluded at the national, regional, territorial, sectoral, basic levels, etc. is very complex and extensive. The legislative basis for the social partnership model is the relevant conventions and recommendations of the ILO, the laws of the Russian Federation “On collective agreements and agreements”, “On trade unions, their rights and guarantees of activity”, “On the procedure for resolving collective labor disputes”, as well as laws on social partnership adopted at the level of constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

So, the formed Russian model of social partnership has a number of specific features:

1) social partnership was introduced as a way to resolve social and labor conflicts;

2) it extended not only to the sphere of labor relations, but also to the social sphere;

3) due to the weakness of the production link of enterprises, the conclusion of collective agreements at specific enterprises did not become prevalent.

All members of society, when viewed more broadly, can be represented as social partners. Partnership, even at this level, cannot be successfully implemented in all types of government. Thus, a totalitarian state, which to a certain extent stands above society and suppresses the interests of the population, does not create conditions for the development of social partnership. Social partnership is an obligatory element of government, and in a social state it is the most important principle of organizing interaction between authorities, workers and employers in the social and labor sphere. In the implementation of the last of these features based on the system of social partnership, as a civilized mechanism for preserving civil peace and harmony in society by achieving a mutually acceptable balance of interests of the employee, employer and state in the settlement of socio-economic and labor relations, an important role belongs to trade unions. The area of ​​special attention of trade unions is the social policy of the state, its specific impact on the position of the employee and his family members.

Russian Tripartite Commission for the Regulation of Social and Labor Relations (RTK) is designed to regulate the socio-economic, labor and professional interests of the parties to social partnership at the federal level and is a permanent body of the social partnership system in Russia. The legal basis for the activities of the RTK is the laws of the Russian Federation “On Collective Bargains and Agreements” dated March 11, 1992, “On the Russian Tripartite Commission for the Regulation of Social and Labor Relations” dated May 1, 1999. The subjects of the RTK are all-Russian associations of trade unions, all-Russian associations of employers , Government of the Russian Federation.

Main functions social state as an institution that determines the legal framework of social partnership, are: the formation of a legal space that ensures interaction between the three parties; participation in resolving conflicts in the field of social and labor relations; reconciliation of “warring” systems. The Ministry of Labor and Social Development of the Russian Federation and other interested ministries and departments act as authorized representatives of the state. The Federal Law “On Trade Unions, Their Rights and Guarantees of Operations” secured the right of trade unions to represent and protect the interests of workers, conduct collective bargaining, conclude collective contracts and agreements, as well as monitor their implementation. Employers have not yet formed a well-structured community. To the greatest extent, their role was assumed by the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs and the Congress of Russian Business Circles.

The main tasks of the RTK include:

Conducting collective negotiations and preparing a draft general agreement between all-Russian associations of trade unions, all-Russian associations of employers and the government of the Russian Federation;

Promoting contractual regulation of social and labor relations at the federal level;

Conducting consultations on issues related to the development of draft federal laws and other regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation in the field of social and labor relations, federal programs in the field of labor, employment, labor migration, social security;

Coordination of the positions of the parties on the main directions of social policy;

Consideration, at the initiative of the parties, of issues arising during the implementation of the general agreement;

Disseminating the experience of social partnership, informing industry (intersectoral), regional and other commissions for regulating social and labor relations about the activities of the Commission;

Studying international experience, participating in events held by relevant foreign organizations in the field of social and labor relations and social partnership, conducting consultations within the Commission on issues related to the ratification and application of international labor standards.

The RTC is formed on the basis of the principles:

Voluntary participation of all-Russian associations of trade unions and all-Russian associations of employers in the activities of the RTK;

Powers of the parties;

Independence and independence of each all-Russian association of trade unions, each all-Russian association of employers, the government of the Russian Federation in determining the personal composition of its representatives in the RTK. The representation of all-Russian associations of trade unions, all-Russian associations of employers, the government of the Russian Federation as part of the parties to the RTK is determined by each of them independently in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation and the charters of the relevant associations.

The Russian tripartite commission has been functioning for only ten years. During this time, it has become one of the most important tools for implementing the principles of social partnership in particular, and the principles of the welfare state in general. The main directions for further improving the system of social partnership in Russia are: strengthening the system of organizational and legal framework of collective bargaining relations; a clearer theoretical and methodological substantiation of mechanisms for solving social and labor problems; strengthening information, financial and personnel support for the functioning model. The development of social partnership in Russia, along with other measures taken, should lead to the strengthening of the basic principles of the social state.

Test questions and assignments:

1. Define the concept of “social partnership”.

2. What fact became the basis and important condition for the development of the theoretical, methodological and practical foundations of social partnership?

3. When did the formation of the modern model of social partnership in Russia begin?

4. What is the main essence of the Russian model of social partnership?

5. What tasks does the Russian tripartite commission for regulating social and labor relations set?

6. Name the basic principles of the functioning of the tripartite commission for regulating social and labor relations.

3.4. Features of social sector management in

social state

Key words: branches of the social sphere, models of the social sphere, indicators of development of the social sphere, social infrastructure, social community, social structure, social sphere, social development, social regulation, social process, development strategy of the social sphere, living conditions.

In the scientific literature there are three approaches to defining the concept of the social sphere of society.” First approach identifies the social sphere with subsystem of society, designed to ensure reproduction, a decent level and quality of life, and the necessary human potential. Such a subsystem includes social institutions formed in the form of institutions of family, education, labor and employment, material and spiritual consumption, and in the form of systemic branches of the social sphere (culture, education, science, health care, physical culture and sports) (See, for example: Osadchaya G.I. Social sphere of society: Theory, methodology and methods of social analysis: Abstract for the degree of Doctor of Social Sciences - M., 1996. - P. 20).

Second approach by social sphere means system of relations, forming the social structure of society. The priority relationships for consideration are the relationships between social groups, layers, tenders, as well as sectoral and regional social communities" (See, for example: Where is Russia going? Transformation of the social sphere and social policy. - M., 1998. - P. 7) Although the second approach, without claiming to be an independent sphere of social activity, logically complements the first, ultimately, even interrelated approaches do not consider living conditions as a component of the social sphere.

Introduction

Socio-economic transformations in Russia are largely reflected in the state of the social sphere, which is the most important indicator of the degree of economic and political development of society. In recent decades, the systemic crisis has hit the social sphere quite hard, the consequences of which have been polarization and degradation of the social structure, impoverishment of the population, falling labor prices, the danger of mass unemployment, a deep crisis in the quality and way of life, and the transformation of Russian society into a society of confrontation. In this regard, recently there has been a clear turn of the state towards social policy, the implementation of a significant number of social projects, and increased attention to issues of reforming the social sphere on the part of the authorities and society. This indicates the relevance of the problem of forming an optimal model of social policy for Russia.

Today it becomes obvious that effective social policy is impossible without the active participation of the entire population, various regions and local communities. It is at the regional and municipal level that the state’s social policy acquires specific features and character.

Currently, for Russia, the question of the nature and content of state social policy is very complex and ambiguous. Article 7 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation states: “The Russian Federation is a social state, the policy of which is aimed at creating conditions that ensure a decent life and free development of people.” And in a social state, social policy is designed to ensure the creation of conditions for a decent life and free development of a person, and therefore to be one of the strategically important areas of development of society as a whole.

Therefore, it is important to consider social policy as a system of targeted government actions to regulate relations between various social groups of the population in terms of increasing public welfare, improving the quality and standard of living, rational use of labor potential and, on this basis, increasing the efficiency of the country’s economy. In a broad sense, social policy is also understood as a system of certain relationships and interactions between social groups, social strata of society, the core of which is, first of all, the social interests and well-being of the individual and society as a whole.

The central place among all subjects belongs to the state, represented by its representative, executive and judicial bodies operating at the federal, regional and municipal levels. They formulate a general concept, determine the main directions of social policy, its strategy, tactics, form a social information field, provide a legislative and legal basis, and implement specific provisions on the ground.

Although the state is the central subject of social policy, it is not the only one. Its role is largely reinforced by the role of many civil society institutions to which the state delegates a wide range of functions. However, the peculiarity and uniqueness of the role of the state lies in its responsibility for social stability in society, the stability of the social position of citizens, families, social groups, and the implementation of a policy of progressive development of society. This is due to the very nature of the state as the only political and legal subject with the full range of powers.

The main goal of social policy is to create a favorable social climate and genuine social harmony based on a balance of different social interests through certain mechanisms that ensure the satisfaction of the basic vital needs of the population and the growth of the quality of life of all citizens. However, along with it, there is a system of goals that reflects the desired results of social changes for specific subjects of social policy. From this stems its content and implementation mechanisms.

Summarizing the tasks of social policy that ensure the normal development of society, given in various literature, we can highlight the following:

· social protection of a person and his basic socio-economic rights;

· creating conditions for improving the well-being of each person and society as a whole;

· maintaining a certain status of various social groups and relations between them, the formation and reproduction of the optimal social structure of society;

· development of social infrastructure (housing and communal services, transport and communications, education, healthcare, information);

· formation of economic incentives for participation in social production;

· creating conditions for the comprehensive development of a person, satisfying his needs and the possibility of realization in free labor.

Social policy performs a number of functions:

1. Ensuring social sustainability of society, social security of society.

2. Ensuring the political stability of power.

3. Ensuring such a distribution of power in the economy (property) that would be recognized by the majority as fair and not requiring a struggle for redistribution.

4. Establishing a system of distribution of economic resources and economic effect that more or less suits the vast majority of the population.

5. -Providing society and the state with the necessary and sufficient level of environmental safety.

6. Providing society and the state with the necessary and sufficient level of social security for both the population as a whole and each of its social groups.

Mechanisms of social policy

Various mechanisms are used to form and implement social policy: legal, financial, tax, administrative, political.

Legal mechanism is ensured by the legislative branch of government through the creation of a legislative and regulatory framework, primarily in terms of social protection of the population and the functioning of social insurance systems.

The regulatory framework for the implementation of social policy in the Russian Federation can be divided into three groups:

1. Federal regulations, including federal laws, legal acts of the President of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Russian Federation. This group includes system-forming documents that form the basis of state social policy, as well as regulatory documents of a current nature that determine the conditions for the implementation of the former. Developed by state bodies of legislative and executive power.

2. Regional regulatory legal acts, including regional legislation in this area, as well as acts of executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. This group includes documents that specify the conditions for the implementation of social policy in specific constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

3. Regulatory and legal acts of local governments that determine the specifics of the implementation of social policy at the local level.

It should be noted that federal regulations and legal acts are conceptual in nature, defining the main directions and principles for the implementation of social policy, while regional legislation and acts of local governments are aimed at establishing specific mechanisms for the implementation of social policy.

For example, an important legal mechanism for implementing the state’s social policy is the system of state minimum social standards, which are established at the legislative level.

Social standard - the minimum required level of meeting the social needs of the population (minimum wage 5965, minimum level of social pensions (The average social pension in 2015 is approximately 6170 rubles)

and other social benefits, mandatory standards and programs within which education is free, a list of treatment and preventive services provided at the expense of budgetary funds, etc.).

In this regard, the tasks of the federal level of government include the development and approval of state minimum social standards at the federal level, providing state guarantees for their implementation.

Financial mechanism is an instrument for the formation and use of financial resources intended to support social policy measures, as well as the activities of structures performing these functions.

Tax mechanisms social policies involve the use of tax levers and incentives to orient business entities towards pursuing adequate social policies and increasing the level of economic independence and social security provided by their own efforts.

Administrative mechanism is based on the implementation of acts of federal executive authorities, executive authorities of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as local self-government bodies of municipalities (the essence lies in administrative influence on subjects of social policy).

Political mechanism social policy includes: political decisions, involvement of political parties, public and religious associations in the implementation of social policy, lobbying activities.

1.3. Main institutions and mechanisms for implementing state social policy

The acquisition by the state of social functions itself changed its entire functional structure. Social functions have become dominant, new functional systems with a social orientation are constantly emerging, the number of social functions is increasing, and they are significantly transforming the legal, power and economic characteristics of the state.

Currently content social policy determined by the following integrated social areas:

Employment policy and social and labor relations, creating conditions for decent work;

Revenue Regulation Policy;

Population reproduction policy;

Policy for the development of the sphere of social services;

Regional social policy;

Social protection and support.

In modern society, an institutional structure of social policy has formed, the main links of which are:

System of social guarantees (minimum social standards);

Social assistance system;

Social insurance system.

Social guarantee system involves the provision of social benefits subject to their universal availability, and the distribution of benefits occurs according to needs. The state guarantees the social protection of citizens.

Social assistance system operates on the principle of social care of society for its socially vulnerable members and social charity. It provides for unified approaches to identifying various population groups and providing them with social assistance. A special place in the institutional structure of social policy is occupied by the private system of social assistance and social insurance, which is based on the principle of personal responsibility.

Social insurance system assumes for all citizens the obligation to pay insurance premiums and a proportional (or not) relationship between insurance payments and the amount of social benefits received. The social insurance system is built on the principle of public solidarity and state responsibility for its citizens. Therefore, as an economic category, insurance is a system of economic relations, including a set of various forms and methods of forming trust funds of funds to compensate for damage in the event of various unforeseen adverse events, as well as to provide assistance to citizens in the event of insured events.

The classification of types of social insurance is based on different types of social risk. Social insurance can be defined as a system of legal, economic and organizational measures to compensate and minimize certain types of social risks. The main types of social insurance are:

Insurance for loss of ability to work (for old age and disability as a result of general diseases and accidents at home and in transport);

Insurance against industrial accidents (industrial injuries and occupational diseases), which provides insurance for temporary and permanent disability;

Unemployment Insurance;

Medical insurance (insurance of the costs of providing medical care).

The nature of the organization of insurance institutions can be chosen as the basis for the classification of social insurance. For example, insurance for each type of social risk can be organized on a voluntary basis. At the same time, participation in one or another type of insurance may also be of a compulsory nature; in particular, the state may legally oblige certain groups of the population to insure themselves or third parties against one or another type of social risk. In this case, insurance becomes mandatory.

The definition of forms of social insurance, their main functions and tasks depends on the organizational and legal structures and financial mechanism, as well as significant diversity in the working conditions of workers and the natural and climatic conditions of their residence. For example, in Russia it is required to create three compulsory forms of insurance - general social insurance, professional and territorial social insurance.

Compulsory general social insurance must cover all groups of workers without exception, regardless of the form of ownership of enterprises and organizations. Taking into account the increased occupational risk of damage to health (the level and severity of occupational injuries and occupational diseases) underlies the system of compulsory professional social insurance. Mandatory territorial social insurance must take into account the specifics of working and living conditions in difficult and extreme natural and climatic conditions.

In addition, the high degree of differentiation of population incomes that has developed in modern Russia under the conditions of market transformations creates prerequisites for the organization of voluntary insurance. Insurers can be both employers and employees themselves. The issue of voluntary (additional) insurance should be resolved in each specific case through collective agreements or individually.

In its content, social insurance includes not only cash payments and compensation, but also certain services for treatment, rehabilitation and prevention, and over time the importance of these components will increase, and the effectiveness of modern social insurance systems is largely determined by these criteria. At the same time, since the social insurance system applies mainly to the employed population, the social protection system must provide another important component - various types of services and payments that are provided to the population within the framework of the social assistance system. Together, these two forms of social protection of the population allow the state to fulfill its social function.

In the domestic economic literature the concept of “social protection of the population” is often used. In an expanded interpretation, this term (like the less common term “social support network”) suggests the possibility of denoting all the above-described elements of the institutional structures of social policy. In a narrower interpretation, the term “social protection” is similar to the concept of “welfare”. As is known, the lack of standardized terminology makes it possible for individual specialists in certain cases to replace one concept with another. At the same time, specialists of the International Labor Office include social insurance and social assistance as social protection, the main characteristics of which are as follows (Table 1.1).

Table 1.1

The division of social protection into social insurance and social assistance is due, firstly, to the methods of taking into account (not taking into account) social risk and, secondly, to the difference in sources of financing. Social insurance is the insurance contributions of employers and workers, and with social assistance, these are resources accumulated in the budget system mainly through taxation. As for benefits for low-income families, disabled people since childhood, family assistance, these types of social protection are not related to the payment of insurance premiums and by their nature are not insured events. Accordingly, their provision should be attributed to the system of state social assistance (welfare) or to other state social programs.

The classification of institutional structures into the state (public) or private sector is carried out depending on the nature of the ownership and the procedure for financing. Revenues, i.e., resources at the disposal of government institutions and organizations engaged in providing social benefits (social guarantees and social protection) to the population, are generated mainly through mandatory payments by economic entities, i.e., are built on the basis of global taxation. Therefore, when considering the state’s social expenditures carried out through the fiscal system, it is necessary to take into account the phenomenon of “fiscal illusion” of citizens, which is expressed in the presence of a time lag between tax revenues, as well as the use of indirect taxes and public debt, which leads to the illusion of their free provision.

Revenues, i.e., resources at the disposal of non-governmental non-profit organizations that provide non-market social services to the population, are generated through voluntary contributions and paid services, as well as donations from the population and income from property.

In the case of mixed financing, the institutional structure providing a social benefit can be classified as either the private or public sector of the economy according to the predominance of the financing order.

In recent decades, in the world practice of providing social services to the population by the state, contractual relations between the state and non-governmental non-profit organizations have become widespread. According to L.I. Jacobson, this is explained by the fact that some types of goods, which have traditionally been classified as public, have the properties and features of private goods and, therefore, can be provided in whole or in part above the minimum social standard determined by society on a paid basis. The nature of such public goods corresponds to a special structure of the institutional mechanism, which presupposes the possibility of separating the functions of their production and consumption from the functions of their payment. The choice of social services can be organized by providing each citizen (family) with special social vouchers (education, housing, food vouchers, etc.), which he has the right to present to any organization of his choice. In the case when the choice is between budgetary organizations, the situation can be characterized as internal competition and quasi-market relations, and if the organization is not budgetary, then these will already be normal market relations within the framework of interaction between the public and private sectors.

The practical application of various institutional mechanisms that ensure interaction between the public and private sectors in solving social problems, in our opinion, can be effective only if it is not accompanied by an increase in transaction costs, which may exceed the income from the introduction of institutional innovations.

To characterize government social spending, it is necessary to analyze various factors influencing the volume, structure and dynamics of this type of government spending. These factors are due to the change in the role, main functions and tasks of the state in modern society, therefore the current situation is characterized by a constant increase in social expenditures of the state as part of the general trend towards an increase in public expenditures. This trend was described at the end of the 19th century. German scientist A. Wagner, according to whom there are a number of main reasons for the preferential growth of public spending compared to private ones.

An increase in family income and an increase in social welfare lead to an increase in spending on public needs, which is due to the greater elasticity of demand for public goods than for private ones, which is explained by greater inertia in the process of forming needs for public goods compared to private ones. According to Professor A. Maslow, the author of the theory of the hierarchy of needs, satisfaction of the highest level needs related to the self-realization of the individual can be carried out mainly by expanding the scope of social services (since the process of personal self-realization is a social phenomenon).

Changes that occurred in the 20th century. in the territorial settlement of people (mass urbanization), as well as in the structure of the population (mass aging), led to changes in family structure, the transition from the traditional patriarchal family to the modern nuclear one. This is reflected in the change from the extensive type of demographic reproduction to the intensive one, which involves, first of all, the reproduction of a person’s intellectual potential (through the development of the human personality to the creation of the labor potential of society).

If we consider how the reasons described above are reflected in the growth of public social expenditures, it should be noted that expenditures on education and healthcare, as is known, are nothing more than investments in human capital. These investments are of an investment nature, since they are aimed at improving the quality of labor resources, which are one of the factors (in the triune formula “labor, land, capital”) of social wealth. Conducted special studies reflect the relationship: the higher the level of education, the lower the unemployment rate, as well as an inversely proportional relationship between investments in human capital and the level of transfer social payments, which, as is known, undermine the incentives to find work among low-income groups of the population and lead them to a condition that is defined in economic literature as a “poverty trap.” Thus, in the United States, in an urbanized environment, the third generation of citizens has already grown up and grown old, whose representatives have never worked anywhere and do not want to work, but are supported by the so-called welfare state. To solve this problem, in recent decades, significant adjustments have been made to government programs for the provision of social transfers, which involves replacing social security programs with work motivation programs.

A very serious factor determining the growth of public social expenditures is the special demographic situation in most economically developed countries (including Russia), caused by the massive aging of the urbanized population. The aging of the population (although this is considered an indicator of the progress of civilization in the 20th century) leads not only to an increase in the need for resource provision for pension funds, but also to an increase in the cost of medical care.

In these conditions, to prevent the collapse of the state pension system, it is necessary to develop a new approach, which involves abandoning the currently existing predominantly state system of financing pension provision (through the budget or extra-budgetary fund).

In connection with the development of scientific and technological progress in recent decades, relatively new reasons have emerged that determine the growth of public social expenditures, for example those associated with “Baumol’s disease” - named after the American professor W. Baumol, who discovered a pattern of lagging growth in labor productivity (due to the impossibility of replacing living labor materialized) in the service sector (including the socio-cultural sphere) in contrast to the sphere of material production. This reason is largely related to the growth of both transformation and transaction costs (for example, the problem associated with means testing or the expansion of institutional structures). The growth of social spending is also seriously influenced by socio-political factors - this is the problem presented above of the presence of a “fiscal illusion” among the population, which is used by representatives of the bureaucratic apparatus and politicians.

The ever-increasing volume of economic resources allocated to cover public social expenses makes the problem of their effective use increasingly urgent, which requires approaches from the positions of both macro- and microeconomic analysis. The macroeconomic approach includes an analysis of the allocation of resources to cover public social expenditures from the point of view of achieving sustainability and balance of key macroeconomic indicators, such as GNP, inflation and unemployment rates, tax rates and bank interest rates, as well as levels of investment activity and budget deficit. No less important is the microanalysis of public social expenditures, carried out from the perspective of the primary economic link, namely the household, which involves an assessment of the mechanisms for the formation and structure of the family budget, since there is a close relationship (including in the form of constitutional guarantees) between family expenditures on acquisition of socially significant benefits and items of the state budget for the corresponding types of expenses.

The structure of government spending, carried out through the consolidated budget and extra-budgetary funds, may have significant differences depending on the corresponding priorities in the financial policy of the state, although in general it is determined by the framework conditions set out in the Budget Code of the Russian Federation and the main general theoretical provisions of the economy of the public sector.

In addition, there are a number of basic approaches to classifying the structure of public social expenditures. The first of them corresponds to the principles of state budget execution, which is based on a departmental or functional approach to resource allocation. The second approach is a grouping of government social expenditures according to service criteria - expenditures aimed at people (personal expenditures) or expenditures aimed at capital (capital expenditures). The latter, in turn, should be divided into two types - current material costs and investments. The classification approaches to the structure of public social expenditures described above are very convenient for various kinds of analytical purposes in the process of assessing budget indicators, but do not reveal the economic nature of this type of public expenditure, since they do not reflect their impact on national income. The most appropriate approach to assessing the impact of social expenditures on national income is their classification proposed by the English economist A. Pigou, who proposed dividing all public expenditures into transfer and non-transfer payments. He included non-transfer payments as society's expenses for servicing factors of production and purchasing goods and services, and this, as is known, can change not only the structure, but also the volume of consumption. As for transfer payments, they, according to A. Pigou, characterize only the transfer of income from taxpayers to transfer recipients; accordingly, the latter do not increase the volume of personal consumption, but only change its structure. This is explained by the fact that transfer payments in the revenue side of the state budget are opposed by taxes, and if the former increase household income, then taxes reduce it, and therefore cannot lead to changes in the total volume of personal consumption. It should be noted that, by influencing the structure of demand, transfer payments create demand for certain types of goods and services, and this, in turn, shapes the investment environment.

Literature

1. V. Papava “The role of the state in modern economic

system", Questions of Economics, N 11, 1993.

2. Livshits “The State in a Market Economy”, Russian

economic journal, N 11-12, 1992, N1, 1993.

3. S. Holland "Planning and mixed economy", Questions

Economics, N 1,1993.

4. V. Varga “The role of the state in a market economy”, MEiMO, N 10-

5. Zastavenko, Raizberg “State programs and the market”,

Economist, N 3,1991.

6. I. P. Merzlyakov “On the formation of a market economy”, Finance,

7. E. Chuvilin, V. Dmitrieva “Government regulation and

price control in capitalist countries", Moscow, "Finance and

statistics", 1991.

8. K. McConnell, S. Brew "Economics", Tallinn, 1993.

9. V. Maksimova, A. Shishov "Market economics. Textbook",

Moscow, SOMINTEK, 1992.

The implementation of social policy is the process of translating legal regulations into the behavior of relevant subjects.

The subjects of social policy in the Russian Federation, as mentioned above, are:

State

Subjects of the federation

State authorities and local governments

Enterprises and organizations.

It is they who must implement the following legal requirements in the process of implementing social policy:

1. right to freedom of labor

2. the right to protection of motherhood, childhood and family

3. right to social security

4. right to housing

5. right to health protection and medical care

6. right to education.

The above rights, within the meaning of Art. 7 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, constitute the content of the social policy of our state.

The most important principles for implementing the content of social policy are:

1. formation of a system of social values ​​and norms that are generally significant for the majority of the population

2. compliance with the criteria of social security of society

3. provision by the state of minimum living standards for all members of society under any conditions.

The mechanisms for implementing the above requirements in the Russian Federation are:

1. social guarantee system

2. social assistance system

3. social insurance system

4. creation and implementation of priority national projects in the field of social sphere.

Let's look at each of the mechanisms in more detail.

The system of social guarantees involves the provision of social benefits subject to their universal availability, and the distribution of benefits occurs according to needs. In the Russian Federation, these guarantees are entirely assumed by the state. This is confirmed by the fact that the budget of the Russian Federation in recent years has been completely socially oriented. In this regard, it is important to note that in the context of the global financial crisis, our state does not alienate these responsibilities. This is evidenced by the words of D.A. Medvedev, President of the Russian Federation: “Even despite the crisis, in the context of reducing expenses and adjusting budgets, money can be found, I am absolutely sure of this.”

The social assistance system operates on the basis of the principle of social care of society for its socially vulnerable members. This principle is implemented in the Russian Federation by:

The state, through the identification of socially vulnerable categories of citizens, through the creation of a state network of social institutions to help such citizens, through the establishment of state benefits for these groups of the population.

Local authorities and state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation - through ensuring the activities of social service facilities.

Enterprises, organizations and citizens - through voluntary donations. For example, in the Novgorod region, the “Christmas Marathon” charity event has been operating for many years; Leading enterprises of the city provide assistance to their former employees - veterans of the Great Patriotic War.

Thus, the social assistance system remains entirely in the hands of the state, this is its responsibility. Society helps socially vulnerable categories of citizens only due to its capabilities. For him this is not an obligation, but a permission. All this follows from the semi-paternalistic essence of Russia as a social state.

The third mechanism for implementing the state's social policy is the social insurance system.

This system assumes for all citizens the obligation to pay insurance premiums and a proportional relationship between insurance payments and the amount of social benefits received.

The main types of social insurance are:

1. insurance for loss of ability to work (for old age and disability, as a result of general diseases and accidents)

2. insurance against accidents at work

3. unemployment insurance

4. health insurance.

In Russia, the creation of three compulsory forms of insurance is required - general social insurance, professional and territorial social insurance.

Compulsory general social insurance must cover all groups of workers without exception, regardless of the form of ownership of enterprises and organizations. Taking into account the increased occupational risk of damage to health underlies the system of compulsory professional social insurance. Mandatory territorial insurance must take into account the specifics of working and living conditions in difficult climatic conditions.

It turns out that the state completely gives this implementation mechanism to society, thereby sharing with it responsibility for welfare in the social sphere.

Despite this, the state still controls this implementation mechanism. This control is carried out through the activities of authorized government bodies.

All this once again indicates that Russia is a semi-paternalistic social state.

In general, state authorities of the Russian Federation and its constituent entities, local governments have quite extensive powers in the social sphere. For example, they carry out general management of these relations, prepare the legislative framework for social policy, develop programs for the development of social infrastructure of society, monitor the activities of subjects of social policy, carry out its financing, establish responsibility for violations of the law and for non-fulfillment or improper performance of their duties by subjects .

This wide range of powers of the above bodies became possible due to the fact that in the Russian Federation there are the following levels of implementation of social policy:

State

Regional (exists due to the fact that powers are delegated to the regions to guarantee social benefits to the population)

Municipal (at this level, social issues of local importance are resolved, that is, issues of a specific municipal entity).

The system of guarantees for the implementation of social policy also speaks about the semi-paternalistic essence of the Russian Federation. It includes the following elements:

1. constitutional guarantees (enshrining in the basic law the social essence of the Russian Federation as one of the foundations of the constitutional system, establishing inalienability and recognizing the social rights of citizens as directly applicable)

2. financial guarantees (extensive financing of social infrastructure from budgets of all levels, recognition of these budgets as socially oriented).

In conclusion, it should be said that many shortcomings in the management of social policy, which arose in Soviet times, have today worsened at all three levels of management: a mechanism for earning funds for social needs has not developed (especially in municipalities), and minimum social guarantees are increasingly not observed and the rights of the population, there is often a lack of both strategic and tactical initiatives of regional and municipal authorities to improve the socio-cultural sphere.

7. Mechanism for implementing social policy

The formation and functioning of the mechanism for implementing and managing social processes is determined by the objective needs and trends of social development. It is the needs and trends that predetermine the structure of the mechanism, the set and use of its components.

At its core, the mechanism for implementing social policy is a complex system of institutional and non-institutional subjects of social life, the interaction of which makes it possible to theoretically comprehend and formalize the social interests of citizens, social groups, and the population as a whole, to develop a social strategy of the state and social programs and to organize coordinated substantive and practical activities government bodies, civil society institutions and citizens for their implementation based on the existing regulatory framework.

The mechanism for implementing social policy in Russia is focused on solving the most important social problems. Their main meaning and content are set out, for example, in the Address of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly (1998) and are aimed at harmonizing social relations, ensuring political stability and civil harmony.

The mechanism for implementing social policy has a complex structure:

the subject of social policy is the state in the totality of all its bodies focused on regulating social relations; political parties; socio-political movements and other institutions of civil society;

the object of social policy is social processes in society in all their substantive diversity and various forms of manifestation.

It is important to take into account that in the content-activity aspect, each phase of the mechanism should reflect the high dynamism of social relations, the diversity of people's needs, the level and content of their social interests.

The mechanism of social policy is implemented through the system of social security and social services. Social security - programs related to the payment of funds to unemployed citizens (by age, in case of disability, loss of a breadwinner, etc.). Social security is a government program for the full or partial support of disabled people. In turn, the social security system consists of social insurance and public assistance. Social insurance is a system of relations for the distribution and redistribution of national income, consisting in the formation of special insurance funds for the maintenance of persons who do not participate in social labor. The social insurance system is a program that includes gratuitous payments to all members of society, regardless of their income, upon the occurrence of a certain event in their life (retirement, disability, job loss, pregnancy and childbirth, loss of a breadwinner, etc.). Social insurance funds are formed from government subsidies and insurance contributions paid by employers and working citizens. The social insurance system includes pension, medical, unemployment and industrial accident insurance. Another part of the government's social security program is public assistance. Public assistance - programs to provide assistance to persons officially recognized as people who do not have a means of subsistence, that is, below the poverty line. Public assistance is aimed at maintaining the income of the poorest segments of the population, regardless of their participation in labor activity and payment of insurance premiums, and is financed from government tax revenues. Public assistance can be in the form of cash payments or in kind (free lunches, food stamps, sales of goods at reduced prices).

The social service system includes healthcare, education, vocational training, employment services and some other areas. Social services can be financed both from the state budget and from extra-budgetary funds created from tax revenues or contributions from firn and citizens. Along with state institutions, social services are also provided by private enterprises, both on a paid basis and through the financing of a portion of expenses by the state.

There are various classifications of social policy models. However, in most of them the determining criterion is the role and degree of participation in the implementation of social policy of the state, civil society institutions and individual citizens. Based on the geopolitical aspect, Scandinavian, continental, American-British and South European models of social policy are distinguished.

In the Scandinavian model, a significant part of social spending is borne by the state, which bears primary responsibility for the social well-being of its citizens and is the main producer of social services. Social security is understood here as a legal right of citizenship, and all citizens have the right to equal, tax-financed social security. This model is, to one degree or another, embodied in the policies of countries such as Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and Norway. Within the framework of the continental model, a strict connection is established between the level of social protection and the duration of professional activity. It is based on social insurance, the services of which are financed mainly by contributions from the insured. In this model, the state is generally responsible only for issuing social benefits to recipients, i.e., for social security, but does not organize social services. This model is followed by Germany, France, Austria, and Belgium. The American-British model is characterized by minimal state participation in the social sphere. The state assumes responsibility only for maintaining the minimum income of all citizens and for the well-being of the weakest and most disadvantaged sections of the population. This model is based on the thesis that everyone has the right to minimal social protection, and the dependence of social payments on previous contributions contradicts the idea of ​​equality of people. Social programs rely primarily on private savings and private insurance. This model includes social insurance with fairly low benefits and social assistance, which plays a dominant role. A similar model of the welfare state is typical for the USA, England and Ireland. The level of social security in the Southern European model is relatively low. In this regard, the family and other institutions of civil society play a significant role in the social protection system. This model of social policy can be characterized as transitional, since in recent decades, under the influence of socio-economic changes, the mechanism of social protection has begun to improve. A significant stimulus for these changes was the growing processes of European integration, aimed at bringing together the socio-economic parameters of the member countries of the European Union. This model is embodied in the policies of countries such as Italy, Spain, Greece and Portugal. The table shows social indicators that describe the results of social policy measures in countries that adhere to one or another model.