Firstly, the question of institutionalization of sociology in Russia is of interest for historical and sociological analysis from the point of view of changing the world outlook paradigm in educated Russian society of the late XIX — early XX centuries. Secondly, it is a question of purely practical formulation of positivistic, materialistic and opposing ideas and teachings in our society. Sociologism and its institutionalization is the content and form of emergence and consolidation of the accomplished turn of public consciousness. The processes of penetration, dissemination and acquisition of official status by sociology in the institutional forms walked hard and slow. Today it is necessary to consider them retrospectively only in a historical perspective — in the light of the revolutions of 1917 and the events that immediately followed. This article demonstrates that today the emergence of sociological theory and its institutionalization in imperial Russia is not only the subject of interest of historians and social scientists, but also an essential point of understanding the dynamics of new ideas and theories, which must be taken into account in our present and in predicting the future.

The article presents the discussion of the international scientific conference on interdisciplinary research on poverty, held at the University of Salzburg in September 2018. This conference was devoted to the study of the features and factors of spatial inequality.

The institutional context of labour market development synthesizes both direct impact factors (government regulation and relevant laws) and specific institutions — traditions, behavior stereotypes, and cultural features. The article compares several institutional aspects of the labour markets in Russia and Germany. The main feature of the Russian labour market is distinguished out: low unemployment rate and simultaneously very low wages. In fact, the most important incentive for Russians is the fear of losing their jobs and becoming unemployed.
A significant factor of direct impact, determining the differences of these markets, is the amount of unemployment benefits. This factor is the reason for the presence or absence of parasitic attitudes in the society, in particular, among migrants staying in the country.
The various models of market relations that have developed by this time in the two countries have determined the degree of market freedom from state influence. In general, in Germany, the market and employee-employer relations are more controlled by the state. At the same time in Russia the most important priority of the government agencies has become financial efficiency. It often comes into conflict with social efficiency, and sometimes with common sense.
The institutional context of the labour market is formed not only by the market itself and the bodies regulating it. It is influenced by socio-economic and cultural phenomena associated with different spheres of life. In this regard, the authors focused on the pre-school institutions’ availability and operation mode, as well as on the degree of state support for small businesses.

With the largest territory in the world, Russia faces special problems in the distribution of labor resources. Management of territorial mobility becomes an urgent task of the state in the XXI century. From an economic point of view, territorial mobility prevents structural unemployment in the regions and contributes to economic growth. Most often, such mobility is beneficial not only to the state, but also to the citizens themselves, acquiring a stable place of work and thereby improving the quality of their lives. However, in general, the Russian population is characterized by very low mobility. The article analyzes the opinions of experts from the Federal service of labour and employment on this issue. The past of the country has caused a number of features that prevent the movement from the region to the region. These are: the structure of the real estate market (where the predominant objects are owned, not rented), and the collectivism of Russian people (according which moving to a remote region is viewed as a break with the native community), and the tradition of living all life in one place.
In such a situation, the state is forced to develop special social technologies that stimulate people to move. These technologies are located in a continuum — from active stimulation of moving to regions with a shortage of labor resources through serious financial support to consulting and providing information that enable people to make independent solutions. The article considers both general programs of territorial mobility management, implemented by the Federal center and the regions, and special programs, the most famous of which is the “Far-Eastern hectare”. The authors also draw attention to the increasing importance of information and consulting activities of employment services that are carried out in the Internet and allow to synthesize multiple data (on vacancies, housing market, transport accessibility, legal issues, etc.) necessary to improve territorial mobility.

Social insurance occupies a special place in the entire social policy of the state. Developed system of social insurance in the country provides citizens with effective protection mechanisms and thereby ensures economic stability and creates an atmosphere of social cohesion in society. At present, social insurance systems in Russia and Germany have significant differences that include both the structure and functioning of each type of insurance separately. These differences in the organization of social insurance systems in Russia and Germany are traceable from the very beginning. System of social insurance in modern Russia has been developing to a certain extent inconsistently and to the present time still is not completely formed. The German system developed gradually and improved with regard to the features of the interests of society at various stages of its development. The establishment of the Federal Republic of Germany as a social state determined the modern model of the social insurance system. Therefore, the study of the German model is interesting from the point of view of the subsequent possible introduction of its elements into Russian insurance practice.
The article compares social insurance systems of Russia and Germany. The components of the systems are studied; their similarities and differences are revealed. Opinions of experts of the Federal Service for Labor and Employment on the prospects and problems of the development of the Russian model of the social insurance system and the possibility of using the German insurance experience in Russian practice are given.

Informal employment is one of the labour markets’ modern trends in the developed and developing countries. The author performs a review of informal economic activity researches. In particular, the concept of dual economy and its transformation are considered. The author pays attention to the K. Hart’s consepton that changed the prevalent opposition “modern-traditional” sectors of the economy to “formal-informal”. Due to Hart’s researches the informal sector was called the main source of the Third World countries’ development by ILO. Hart himself defining the essence of the informal sector based on Weber’s theory of modernization. According to it, genesis of capitalism demands development of a production and management rational organization. So informality is associated with a special degree of organization, not with a production scale or its productivity.
The industrial society is characterized by formal or standard employment. In the postindustrial period other forms of employment appear under the influence of new informational technologies. The informal employment became normal and immanently inherent in the modern society. But typical doesn’t always mean positive. The wide spread of informality is the main challenge to the sustainable development of the modern countries.
An informal employment growth on the national labour market is one of the main problems. The negative consequences of the informal employment practice are: on the one hand, violation of labour rights, and, on the other hand — underinvestment of the state budget.
As far as a Russians’ subjective opinion on the informal status of employment is concerned, the researches didn’t find any real correlation between being informal employed and self-esteem. The difference between the formal and informal employment for a Russian employees isn’t considerable. The employed Russian population feels equal uncomfortable in the formal and informal sectors. The phenomenon indicates low quality of the formal sector’s institutions.

The development of the digital economy can aggravate the existing problems of the Russian labour market (the high level of informal employment, low labour mobility, growth of precarious employment etc.), can cause a growth of technological unemployment. Automation and digitalization would change most task sets within particular occupations, would radically change distribution of workers by occupations. By 2022, about 53% of labour forces can be re-trained. The Russian employment services have to become an effective structure of mass retraining. The analysis of in-depth expert’s interviews reveals an organizations problem of retraining programs (the focus on the functional tasks of the employment services, the low efficiency of programs, the insufficient financing, the lack relations of the employment services with employers, etc). The authors focused on a problem of interaction between the federal level (Federal service of labor and employment) and regional departments and the employment services. Now, it is necessary to strengthen the role of the federal bodies for the formation of a proactive employment policy. This measure will help us to move from the existing fragmentation in employment management, to transfer the experience and knowledge of the Federal service to all regional structures. Active work of employment services will help to reduce social inequality, will not allow excluding a most of Russian workers from high-paid, high-tech branches of the digital economy.

Many Russians, left without work, share their experiences on the Internet. It is interesting to analyze who unemployment chooses as its victims and how these unemployed perceive and assess the consequences of their situation. To answer these questions, a study was conducted using the method of content analysis. The study revealed how the problem of unemployment is reflected in Russian social networks. The intensity of the discussion of this problem in 2018 is increasing. There is a significant difference between the desired and the actual salary in the future workplace. Many applicants are faced a mismatch of skills obtained during their studies at the universities and those required by the employer. A special place in the comments takes the problem of the work experience and the specifics of its understanding by personnel services, management and applicants.
An analysis of the comments’ information indicates that men are more dissatisfied with the labour market and inclined to “give up” falling into depression. They see more clearly the problems that hinder their successful employment and often perceive these problems as unsolvable.
In general, the perception of the unemployment is related to the recognition of the accident and injustice of getting into the state of the unemployed. Therefore, people specifically create Internet-communities of support, where they share their hardships, but they can not find any valid reason for their current situation. The only rational explanation for this situation seems to be the primary attention in hiring to the kinship and friendship with the candidate or his/her entourage.
There is a high level of despair and depression in the comments, which is due to the predominance of the “internal locus of control” in the mentality of Russians: they are used to control the situation in the sphere of work and labour relations. For many years, employment in the country has been very stable, and nowadays situation is seen by them as something inexplicable and uncontrollable.