The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

Coercion as one of factors of motivation of work of teachers of higher education institutions of 1985-1995 on materials of the Tver region

l. V. Naumova


Work is presented by department of documentary ensuring management of Tver State University.

The research supervisor - the doctor of historical sciences, professor T.I. Slavko

In article the coercion problem relevant now to work which represents administrative punishment or disciplinary punishment is investigated, being one of components of motivation of work. The purpose of work is to reveal a coercion role as factor of motivation of work of teachers of higher education institutions of 1985-1995 on materials of the Tver region.

The article examines the urgent problem of compulsion, which corresponds to an official reprimand or disciplinary punishment and the part of labor motivation. The author aims to determine the role of labor compulsion of scientific and pedagogical staff in universities on the basis of the materials of the Tver region belonging to the period of 1985-1995.

Use of the measures connected with coercion - a problem which rises before most the organizations in the course of formation of a system of motivation of work for increase in production efficiency.

A main goal of a research - studying one of the most important factors of motivation of work of teachers of higher educational institutions in 1985-1995 on materials of the Tver region - a coercion factor.

For disclosure of a goal tasks are formulated: to study the legal labor framework on compulsion of teachers of higher education institutions in recent years of existence of the Soviet Union and the first years of formation of the Russian Federation; to find out on the example of higher educational institutions of the Tver region the stimulating role of compulsion of teachers to work on the basis of contemporary records of higher education institutions.

The research was carried out with attraction of literature on the specified perspective and published (legislative and a regulatory framework) and neopubli-

forged, stored in the state archives (office work documentation of higher education institutions), sources.

Domestic researchers use different concepts of a factor of coercion, characterizing it as negative or negative stimulation, punishment, legal responsibility, administrative, imperious or direct coercion, the forced motivation, etc. 1 When studying a role of coercion among authors occurs in the system of motivation opinion that coercion is not an incentive or appears as the negative and not recommended in use factor. Nevertheless the essence of coercion concludes - sya in application of a system of punishment, penalties, criticism, condemnation or threat of deterioration in any needs of the worker at non-performance of labor duties by it for the purpose of increase in motivation of work.

Need of studying coercion within the state consists in a research of its regulatory framework, meaning its regulating role in all

spheres of life of people. The choice of a transition period of the Russian history for studying coercion is caused by differences of process of work in different economic systems.

Application of collectings in the Soviet Union provided one of paramount problems of the state of strengthening of socialist discipline of work stated in Article 60 of the Constitution of the USSR 1978: "A point of honor of each citizen of the USSR, capable to work, - honest work and observance of labor discipline" 2.

Coercion consisted in application to workers of material, administrative, disciplinary and public penalties for violation or non-compliance with labor obligations by them. Collectings concerning teachers, according to Article 56 of Principles of the legislation on work of 1970, Article 135 the Labour Code of RSFSR 1971 and paragraph 25 of Standard employment policies and procedures of 1984, included use by administration of the organization of remarks, reprimands, strict reprimands and also a last resort - uvolneniya3.

The liability was generally applied for truancies. According to paragraph 26 of Standard rules the decrease in the amount of a single reward for long service either length of service in the specialty or deprivation of the right to a percentage markup for long service for a period of three months was possible; reduction of another holiday on number of days of a truancy (but not less than 12 working days); deprivation in whole or in part a production award, reduction of the size or completely non-payment of a reward following the results of annual raboty4.

The guilty person took liability also in case of causing damage or harm of the organization in course of execution of labor duties at a rate of the direct caused loss in full

volume (no more the average monthly earnings) 5.

Transferring of sequence on the receiving housing of workers for later terms applied for malicious violation of labor discipline, alcoholism, hooliganism, petty theft state or obshchestven - a leg of property and others narusheniy6 was one of specific forms of punishments in the Soviet legislation.

In Soviet period the question of sobriety of workers stood especially sharp. Much attention was paid to the system of punishments concerning the persons which appeared in a drunk workplace in the light of measures for overcoming alcoholism and alcoholism in the USSR 1985. Emergence at work in alcohol intoxication was qualified as minor and administrative offense for which imposing of a penalty, discharge from work, as a rule, with suspension of payment of the salary, deprivation in whole or in part of an award, reduction of the size or completely non-payment of a reward was provided following the results of annual work and also a last resort - termination of the employment contract (dismissal) 7.

The paramount role of labor collectives and trade-union Komi - tet in application of coercive measures was the brightest distinctive feature in the years of existence of the Soviet Union. Creation in labor collectives of a situation of intolerance to violations of labor discipline, strict friendly insistence to the workers who are unfairly carrying out the labor duties was established by normative legal acts. It was expressed in friendly remarks, public reprimands it. item. The trade-union committee of the organization could take measures of public education and influence in the form of friendly criticism, censure, the instruction or preduprezhdeniya8.

44 1


After the collapse of the USSR in the Russian Federation all principles on use of coercive measures automatically ceased to act on the state level. But as the new labor law till 1995 did not develop yet, the uniform concept to which the whole country would have to adhere, actually was absent.

Studying process of application of a system of coercion on a concrete example, it is possible to judge planned character of use by the organization of this factor. Higher education institutions of a coercive measure prepared by at the same time different divisions - office and human resources department, often without coordinating them among themselves. Thus, there was no uniform approach of establishment to application of punishments and, as a result, to work incentives of teachers. It was caused by the fact that at the highest levels of management there was no policy of application of coercive measures, general for all organizations.

Coercion differed concerning senior positions of the dean and head of the department and faculty members. It was connected with their different functions and degree of responsibility. Thus, at higher education institutions there was a dependence of a type of punishment on a position.

Remarks in which preparation the office of higher education institution was engaged were used twice more often to the management, than to prepodavatelyam9. The instruction, the strict instruction and strict prevention were applied only to leading dolzhnostyam10. The reprimands till 1992 were issued to the management on average in higher education institution once a year, to teachers - 1 time in 2 years, since 1992 this ratio was leveled up to 111. Through human resources department unlike office the orders were prepared in relation to the administration 2.5 times more often. Also distinctive feature was otsut-

a stviye of coercive measures in relation to professor's position.

The most common causes which caused application of coercive measures were: the irresponsible relation to preparation of works of students in conferences and weak participation in them; absence of control and inopportuneness of paperwork; insufficient control of work of educational support personnel and also for negligent attitude to execution of official duties 12.

The trade-union committee of staff of higher education institution in the years of existence of the USSR played an important role in compulsion of teachers to work. Types of the collectings applied by trade-union body of higher education institution were: instruction, reprimand, strict reprimand, dismissal and measures of public censure. The dismissals applied generally to assistants for violation labor distsipliny13 were the most widespread, and legislatively not fixed measures of public censure are preventions. The last did not involve consequences, but at the same time told about possible application more strictly punishments for repeated illegal act. Usually a warning was issued for insufficient readiness of faculties to a review competition on the best office and laboratory or for total absence of scientific publications during the last five let14.

the Analysis of office work documentation on coercion revealed need of the division studied for about two periods - till 1991 when punishments were taken out more often and after 1991, characterized by bigger severity. The instruction and the strict instruction were applied only till 1991. Till 1991 on average in higher education institution the reprimands, after - were twice a year issued once a year. The strict reprimand became more active to be used after 1991:

earlier - on average 1 time in 3 years, after - ezhegodno15.

For typically personnel moment of violation of labor discipline till 1990 the reprimands, after - strict reprimands together with monetary nakazaniyem16 were issued. Since 1990 the violation of requirements for work with confidential materials or loss of classified documents for which appeared vygovory17 became the frequent reason of punishment of all faculty.

Only two reasons - low insistence, insufficient control on planning and accounting of teaching and educational work of teachers and also the low level of educational work and oslable-

ny or elimination from control of students - were present at an extent of all decade. However also since 1991 were reduced by 2.5 times.

Thus, being an integral part of stimulation of work, coercion together with motivation and a reward needs to be used as the directing link in the policy of higher education institution for not only increases in motivation of work of research and educational personnel, but also increases in prestigiousness of a teaching profession of the higher school, skill level of young specialists and intensity of development of science in modern Russia.

1 Shapiro S.A. Motivation and stimulation of personnel. M, 2006; T. Ozernikova. Professionalism and labor motivation//Service of shots. 2002. No. 2. Page 26-27; V.V. Sinov. Motivation of work of the experts occupied with innovative activity: Yew. to Sais. Wuchang. degrees edging. econ. sciences. SPb., 1997.
2 Code of laws USSR. 1990. T. 3. Page 14.
3 In the same place there is a T. 2. Page 184; Sheets of VS RSFSR. 1971. No. 50. Article 1007; Bulletin Goskomtruda USSR. 1984. No. 11.
4 Bulletin Goskomtruda USSR. 1984. No. 11.
5 Code of laws RSFSR. 1988. T. 2. Page 7; Code of laws USSR. 1990. T. 2. Page 184; Sheets of VS RSFSR. 1971. No. 50. Article 1007.
6 Accounting rules of the citizens needing improvement of living conditions: Utv. Decision of executive committee of a regional council and presidium of regional trade council of November 5, 1984 No. 313//Union of Right Forces Consultant Plus.
7 Sheets of VS RSFSR. 1984. No. 27. Article 909; Sheets of VS RSFSR. 1971. No. 50. Article 1007; Code of laws USSR. 1990. T. 2. Page 184; Bulletin Goskomtruda USSR. 1984. No. 11.
8 Code of laws USSR. 1990. T. 3. Page 14; Bulletin Goskomtruda USSR. 1984. No. 11. 9GATO. F. R-1213. Op. 1. 4768. L. 25; 5891. L. 85; 7083. L. 147.
10 In the same place. 5591. L. 17; 5182. L. 416.
11 In the same place. 5181. L. 208; 7083. L. 147; 8887. L. 46.
12 TVER STATE UNIVERSITY archive. Op. 2. 2323. L. 11; 2911. L. 129; GATO. F. R-1213. Op. 1. 4769. L. 189; 6289. L. 20; 7083. L. 147.
13 GATO. In the same place. Of a 6678-. L. 67, 116, 150.
14 In the same place. Of a 5988-. L. 36, 70.
15 TVER STATE UNIVERSITY archive. Op. 2. 1940. L. 201; 1692. L. 247; 1690. L. 237; 2911. L. 129; 1501. L. 149; 2324. L. 4; 2913. L. 156.
16 GATO. F. R-1213. Op. 1. 5181. L. 208; 6681. L. 92. 17 In the same place. 8887. L. 45.
Robert Joshua
Other scientific works: