Between Career and Motherhood: Factors Affecting Women’s Career Trajectories After Childbirth in Russia


The paper puts forward the idea that a woman’s class (occupational position) contributes to the formation of certain orientations and values, which further determine a woman’s choice in favor of particular labor and life trajectory after the childbirth. The authors follow the career trajectory of women after the childbirth in Russia to determine which women are more career-oriented and which are more family-oriented. For this, “Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey–Higher School of Economics” (RLMS-HSE) panel data from 2001–2021 are employed. Drawing on a six-year period—the year before the birth and four years after the childbirth—the authors construct the sequences of various status changes (employed, unemployed, parental leave) and identify the featured patterns of mothers’ career trajectories. The authors also analyze the number of years it took for women to return to the labor market after the childbirth. It is assumed that a later entry into the labor market suggests that women are less career-oriented, and vice versa. Additionally, the factors affecting the decision to return to the labor market earlier or later are evaluated. The results of the implemented analysis (an ordinal logistic regression and a multinomial regression) show that women from the higher class tend to return to the labor market quickly, while women from the middle and working class delay entry into the workforce or refuse to develop a career.

Author Biography

Elena N. Gasiukova, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia

Elena N. Gasiukova is a Junior Researcher, HSE University, Laboratory for Comparative Analysis of Development in Post-Socialist Countries. Her main areas of research are social stratification, social mobility, and employment relationships.


  • 30th round RLMS–HSE household data [Data set]. (2021). Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey–Higher School of Economics.

  • Abramov, R. N., Gruzdev, I. A., & Terentiev, E. A. (2019). Work-life balance and sources of stress for the academic staff in Russian research universities. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, 3, 8–26.

  • Archangelskiy, V. N., Shulgin, S. G., & Zinkina, Iu. V. (2020). Reproductive behavior of Russian women as depending on their level of education. RUDN Journal of Sociology, 20(3), 546–559.

  • Arzhenovskii, S. V., & Artamonova, D. V. (2007). Otsenka poter’ v zarplate zhenshchin s det’mi [Econometric estimation of the wage penalty for the motherhood]. Applied Econometrics, 7(3), 66–79.

  • Atencio, A., & Posadas, J. (2015). Gender gap in pay in the Russian Federation: Twenty years later, still a concern (Policy Research Working Paper, No. 7407). The World Bank Group.

  • Attwood, L., & Isupova, O. (2018). “To give birth or not to give birth?”: Having children in Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia. In M. Ilic (Ed.), The Palgrave handbook of women and gender in twentieth-century Russia and the Soviet Union (pp. 447–461). Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Bagirova, A. P., & Blednova, N. D. (2021). Combination of professional and parental labor in assessments of Ural women: Objective and subjective barriers. Woman in Russian Society [Special issue], 150–167.

  • Biriukova, S. S., & Makarentseva, A. O. (2017). Estimates of the motherhood penalty in Russia. Population and Economics, 1(1), 50–70.

  • Blednova, N., & Bagirova, A. (2021). Factor modeling of Russian women’s perceptions of combining family and career. In Communications of the ECMS, 35(1), Proceedings of the 35th ECMS International Conference on Modelling and Simulation, ECMS 2021, May 31st–June 2nd, 2021, United Kingdom (pp. 69–74).

  • Burkhanova, F. B., Asadullina, G. R., Sadretdinova, E. V., Sizonenko, Z. L., & Shaiakhmetova, R. R. (2018). Neformal’naia zaniatost’ zhenshchin: faktor detei [Informal employment of women: The factor of children]. In B. S. Galimov (Ed.), Proceedings of All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference “Blagopoluchnaya Sem’ya–Osnova Schastlivogo Obraza Zhizni”, May 17–18, 2018, Ufa (pp. 47–54). RITS BashGU.

  • Chernova, Z. V. (2012a). Spetsifika gendernykh otnoshenii molodykh vzroslykh [Specifics of gender relations of young adults]. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya, 7, 118–127.

  • Chernova, Z. V. (2012b). The work-family balance: Policy and Individual mothers’ strategies. Journal of Social Policy Studies, 10(3), 295–308.

  • Chernova, Zh., & Shpakovskaia, L. (2010). Young adults: Marriage, partnership, and parenthood. discursive prescriptions and practices in contemporary Russia. Laboratorium: Russian Review of Social Research, 2(3), 19–43.

  • Dorofeeva, Z. E. (2020). Work trajectories of high-resource multi-child mothers. Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal=Sociological Journal, 26(4), 79–95.

  • Duprat-Kushtanina, V. A., & Lutoshkina, S. Y. (2014). Zhenskaya bezdetnost' i stsenarii zhiznennogo puti [Women's childlessness and life path scenarios]. Universe of Russia. Sociology. Ethnology, 23(2), 183–203.

  • Ermolina, A. A., Rokhmina, E. B., Vasil’eva, Iu. M., & Trach, T. (2016, October 17–30). Rozhdenie rebenka kak faktor dokhodnoi obespechennosti zhenshchin. Naskol’ko velik v Rossii “shtraf za materinstvo”? [Childbirth as a factor of women’s income security. What is the “motherhood penalty” in Russia?]. Demoscope Weekly, No. 701–702.

  • Fagan, C., McDowell, L., Perron, D., Ward, K., & Ray, K. (2008). Class differences in mothers’ work schedules and assessments of their “work–life balance” in dual-earner couples in Britain. In J. Scott, S. Dex & H. Joshi (Eds.), Women and employment: Changing lives and new challenges (pp. 199–212). Edward Elgar.

  • Federal State Statistics Service. (n.d.). Demographic yearbook of Russia 2021.

  • Final report of the ESSnet on the harmonisation and implementation of a European socio-economic classification: European Socio-economic Groups (ESeG). (2014). Eurostat.

  • Gosudarstvennye i munitsipal’nye uslugi (funktsii) v Sankt-Peterburge. (n.d.). Edinovremennaia kompensatsionnaia vyplata pri rozhdenii rebenka [Lump sum compensation at birth of a child].

  • Gurko, T. A. (2008). Rossiia: Sotsial’naia politika v otnoshenii molodykh roditelei [Russia: Social policy in relation to young parents]. Vlast’, 6, 10–15.

  • Hall, P. (2005). Interprofessional teamwork: Professional cultures as barriers. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19(1, Suppl.), S188–S196.

  • Ipatova, A. A., & Tyndik, A. O. (2015). Reproduktivnyi vozrast: 30-letnii rubezh v predpochteniiakh i biografiiakh [Reproductive Age: 30 Years Old in Preferences and Biographies]. Universe of Russia. Sociology, Ethnology, 24(4), 123–148.

  • Isupova, O. G. (2015). Materinskaia kar’era: Deti i trudovye strategii [Mother’s career: Children and work strategies]. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya, 10, 195–204.

  • Isupova, O. G. (2018). Attitudes to pronatalist policy measures according to the data of the 2015 micro-census. Demographic Review, 5(3), 25–56.

  • Isupova, O. G., & Utkina, V. V. (2016). Women in the civil service in Russia: Career, family, reproductive intentions. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, 6, 69–88.

  • Karabchuk, T. S., Nagerniak (Malkova), M. A., Sukhova, A. S., Kolotova, E. V., Pankratova, M. L., & Pankratova, V. L. (2012). Zhenshchiny na rossiiskom rynke truda posle rozhdeniia rebenka [Women in the Russian labor market after childbirth]. Vestnik RLMS HSE, 2, 66–94.

  • Karabchuk, T. S., & Pankratova, V. L. (2013). Pay for women with kids in Russia: Is there any discrimination? Journal of Economic Sociology, 14(1), 96–110.

  • Khasieva, D. D. (2021). Career orientations of women in Russia: The kaleidoscope career model. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Management, 20(3), 343–370.

  • Kolosnitsyna, M., & Philippova, A. (2017). Family benefits and poverty: The case of Russia (Higher School of Economics Working Paper No. WP BRP 03/PSP/2017). NRU HSE.

  • Lytkina, T. S., & Iaroshenko, S. S. (2021). On the intersection of gender and class: How single mothers organize their everyday life in post-socialist Russia. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya, 11, 61–72.

  • Magun, V. S. (2009). Normativnye vzgliady na sem’iu u rossiian i frantsuzov: Traditsionnoe i sovremennoe [Normative views on the family among Russians and French: traditional and modern]. In S. V. Zakharov, T. M. Maleva & O. V. Siniavskaia (Eds.), Roditeli i deti, muzhchiny i zhenshchiny v sem’e i obshchestve [Parents and children, men and women in the family and society] (pp. 139–162). NISP.

  • Makarentseva, A. O. (2022). Dinamika vstupleniia v materinstvo v sovremennoi Rossii [The dynamics of entry into motherhood in modern Russia]. Universe of Russia. Sociology. Ethnology, 31(1), 162–182.

  • Nivorozhkina, L. I., Nivorozhkin, A. M., & Arzhenovskii, S. V. (2008). “Tsena” materinstva: Ekonometricheskaia otsenka [The “price” of motherhood: An econometric assessment]. Vestnik Taganrogskogo Instituta Upravleniia i Ekonomiki, 1, 3–20.

  • O dopolnitel’nykh merakh gosudarstvennoi podderzhki semei, imeiushchikh detei [On Additional Measures of State Support for Families With Children]. Federal Law of the Russian Federation No. 256-FZ. (2006, December 29).

  • O ezhemesiachnykh vyplatakh sem’iam, imeiushchim detei [On Monthly Payments to Families With Children]. Federal Law of the Russian Federation No. 418-FZ. (2017, December 28).

  • O gosudarstvennykh posobiiakh grazhdanam, imeiushchim detei [On State Benefits to Citizens With Children]. Federal Law of the Russian Federation No. 81-FZ. (1995, May 19).

  • O molodezhi [On the Youth]. Law of the City of Moscow No. 39 (2009, September 30, rev. on 2011, December 14). The official portal of the Moscow Mayor and Moscow Government.

  • Ob obiazatel’nom sotsial’nom strakhovanii na sluchai vremennoi netrudosposobnosti i v sviazi s materinstvom [On Compulsory Social Insurance in Case of Temporary Disability and in Connection With Motherhood]. Federal Law of the Russian Federation No. 255-FZ. (2006, December 29).

  • Oshchepkov, A. (2021). Gender pay gap in Russia: Literature review and new decomposition results. In T. Karabchuk, K. Kumo, K. Gatskova & E. Skoglund (Eds.), Gendering Post-Soviet space (pp. 211–233). Springer Singapore.

  • Pension Fund of the Russian Federation. (n.d.). Ezhemesiachnoe posobie po ukhodu za rebenkom do 1.5 let [Parental benefits for a child under 1.5 years of age]

  • Popova, D. O. (2009). Transformatsiia semeinykh tsennostei i vtoroi demograficheskii perekhod v Rossii: kto v avangarde? [Transformation of family values and the second demographic transition in Russia: Who’s in the vanguard?]. In S. V. Zakharov, T. M. Maleva & O. V. Siniavskaia (Eds.), Roditeli i deti, muzhchiny i zhenshchiny v sem’e i obshchestve (pp. 163–184). NISP.

  • Posobie pri rozhdenii rebenka v 2022 godu [Benefits for the childbirth in 2022]. (n.d.).

  • Roshchin, S. Iu., & Emelina, N. K. (2022). Meta-analysis of the gender pay gap in Russia. HSE Economic Journal, 26(2), 213–239.

  • Rotkirch, A., & Kesseli, K. (2012). Two children puts you in the zone of social misery’: Childbearing and risk perception among Russian women. In H. Carlbäck, Yu. Gradskova & Zh. Kravchenko (Eds.), And they lived happily ever after: Norms and everyday practices of family and parenthood in Russia and Central Europe (pp. 145–164). CEU Press.

  • Savinskaia, O. B. (2013). Balans raboty i sem’i: Strategii sovmeshcheniya professional’nyh i semejnyh obyazannostej rabotayushchimi materyami v Moskve [Work-Family balance: How working mothers in Moscow reconcile their work and maternity]. The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, 16(2), 142–167.

  • Siniavskaia, O. V., & Golovlianitsina, E. B. (2010, May 1–23). Novye mery semeinoi politiki i naselenie: Budet li dlitel’nym povyshenie rozhdaemosti? [New measures of family policy and the population: will the increase in the birth rate be prolonged?]. Demoscope Weekly, No. 421–422.

  • Siniavskaia, O. V., Grigoryeva I., Kravchenko Z. (2015). Russian Federation country note. In P. Moss (Ed.), 11th international review of leave policies and related research 2015 (pp. 271–277). International Network on Leave Policies & Research.

  • Tarakanovskaia, K. S. (2021). Motherhood and science: Strategies of work–life balance. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, 3, 382–405.

  • Tartakovskaia, I. N. (2019). Precarious employment and work–life balance: Gender aspects. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, 3, 163–178.

  • Tyndik, A. O. (2012). Reproductive attitudes and their realization in modern Russia. The Journal of Social Policy Studies, 10(3), 361–376.

  • Xiao, H. (2000). Class, gender, and parental values in the 1990s. Gender & Society, 14(6), 785–803.

  • Zhuravleva, T. L., & Gavrilova, Y. A. (2017). Analiz faktorov rozhdaemosti v Rossii: chto govoriat dannye RMEZ NIU VShE? [Analysis of fertility determinants in Russia: What do RLMS data say?] HSE Economic Journal, 21(1), 145–187.

How to Cite
Gasiukova, E. (2022). Between Career and Motherhood: Factors Affecting Women’s Career Trajectories After Childbirth in Russia. Changing Societies & Personalities, 6(4), 804–822. doi:10.15826/csp.2022.6.4.204