A notable move from the State Duma centers on potential reforms to the country’s labor framework. Deputy Yaroslav Nilov, who leads the committee overseeing labor matters, social policy, and veterans’ rights, intends to introduce legislation on July 29 that would cap irregular working hours at a maximum of 120 hours per year. The proposed change aims to redefine how non-standard or flexible schedules are handled, setting clear boundaries to prevent overextension of employees through sporadic, non-traditional hours. The goal is to bring balance to the work arrangements that some employers may rely on, ensuring that such practices do not erode workers’ rights or stability in the labor market. The reform would be reflected in the body of the Labor Code, signifying a formal shift in how irregular hours are counted and regulated.
The explanatory note accompanying the draft emphasizes that the reform would establish a hard ceiling for irregular work, while still recognizing the practical needs of certain industries where flexible hours can be advantageous. The proposed approach would define irregular working time as hours that fall outside standard schedules but would not exceed the annual cap of 120 hours, creating a predictable limit for both employers and employees. This measure is designed to curb potential abuses, such as employers exploiting non-traditional hours in ways that could undermine workers’ legitimate interests or misalign with established labor protections.
The reform discussion points to a broader effort to modernize Russia’s labor legislation in line with contemporary work patterns. If enacted, the changes would be embedded within the Labor Code, providing a statutory framework that clarifies permissible irregular work and the corresponding limits. The proposal reflects a careful balance between granting flexibility to employers and safeguarding workers from excessive or opaque scheduling practices. In essence, the plan seeks to formalize irregular hours with a responsible cap, while ensuring that compliance mechanisms support fair treatment and predictable labor conditions.
Support from lawmakers highlights that reducing the scale of irregular work does not inherently harm productivity. On the contrary, there is a view that shorter or more predictable work periods can sustain or even enhance efficiency in certain sectors by reducing fatigue, improving morale, and stabilizing scheduling. Advocates argue that clarity on what constitutes irregular work and the associated cap can create a healthier working environment, provide workers with clearer expectations, and support long-term workforce stability. At the same time, the discussion acknowledges that any reform may require transitional considerations and implementation timelines as industries adjust to new rules.
In recent years, there have been discussions in the State Duma about a variety of measures to support families and workers through changes in work arrangements. Earlier conversations touched on ideas such as a shortened work week targeted at specific groups, including women with two children, which reflects a broader interest in balancing labor participation with personal and family well-being. While these proposals are part of ongoing policy debates, the current focus remains on establishing a robust framework for irregular working time that can be consistently applied across sectors, with protections in place to prevent misuse and to sustain productivity and economic stability.