The concept of the State Committee of Labor of the USSR provides for the abolition, that is, the absorption of regionally differentiated rates and salaries, and coefficients for work in desert and high-altitude areas. However, it seems that such a decision contradicts the economic nature of this type of coefficients. Their main purpose is not to compensate for differences in the cost of labor reproduction, not to ensure the recruitment and retention of personnel in these regions, but to compensate for losses in workers' earnings associated with a drop in their working capacity in extreme natural and climatic conditions. Therefore, it is necessary to look for ways to solve this problem, for example, by applying rational work and rest regimes, reducing working hours in the least favorable periods of the year, adjusting labor standards while maintaining fixed tariff rates and salaries, etc. It is advisable to maintain increased tariff rates when working in desert and high-altitude areas until so far, these measures will not be implemented.
Regulation of the size of the payment fund. Collective agreement definition of levels
wages
The specific feature of this element of costs (for wages) is that the labor collective, as a commodity producer, is interested in minimizing labor costs in the cost of production, and as an aggregate employee, in such a volume of the wage fund that ensures the highest possible level of wages for employees.
This contradiction was resolved through centralized directive and then regulatory regulation of the amount of funds for labor remuneration. In this system, the payment fund is considered as part of the national consumption fund, allocated by the state to an enterprise to pay for labor in exchange for the products they produce, taking into account the final results of economic activity. The actual labor costs could be higher or lower than the specified fund, resulting in savings or overspending of wage funds. Ultimately, there was an ever-deepening gap between the funds accrued to the enterprise for labor and those actually included in production costs. In addition, this gap was constantly deepened by shortcomings in the mechanism of regulatory regulation of funds for labor remuneration.
For a market economy, the existence of such a gap is objectively unacceptable. Para için çevrimiçi slot oynayın 7slots casino güncel giriş
