The COVID-19 statistics available at different dashboards including the UN data show that the number of cases in BRICS countries was about 17% of the world cases and the number of fatalities was about 26% of the world fatalities. To weigh the relative effectiveness of the BRICS countries in their fight against COVID-19, and determine whether they achieved a success or suffered a failure, we looked at the USA statistics and saw that the USA, whose population is almost ten times smaller than that of the BRICS countries, had very high number of cases (about 100 million as of 2020-2022) and high fatality rate. The number of cases in the USA was close to the number of cases in all five BRICS countries and the number of fatalities reached 16.28% of the global fatalities. This comparison reveals that the BRICS countries were more successful in preventing the disease and mitigating its effects than the USA. The higher death rate reflects the differences in the healthcare systems’ capacity.

To a certain extent, this difference might also be attributed to the number of vaccines administered in BRICS countries and in the USA. In the BRICS countries the total number of administered vaccines is about 49% of the world total while in the US the number of administered vaccines is about 4.9% of the world total. The number of vaccines administered in the USA is higher than in Brazil, Russia and South Africa but the numbers of vaccines administered in India and China exceed those in the US by 4 and 6 times respectively. Although the numbers of the administered vaccines do not necessarily correspond to the numbers of vaccinated persons (one person could be vaccinated several times, another not vaccinated at all) the number of administered vaccines points to the protection capacities of a particular country. We can see that in the USA, as well as in Brazil, practically everyone had the opportunity to get two vaccine doses during 2020-2022, in Russia and India everyone could have more than one dose of vaccine, in China more than two doses while in South Africa almost half of the population had no access to vaccination at all; the other half could get only one doze of vaccine. It is thus clear that there are considerable differences between the BRICS. We may argue about the quality of the data but as was noted in the previous section of the paper, we use the official data and assume that they reveal the actual trends even if the numbers are not perfectly accurate.

According to Carlsson-Szlezak, P., Reeves, M., & Swartz, P. (2020) these are the three main channels through which coronavirus pandemic affects the economy. First, it directly reduces consumption of goods and services; second, indirectly, through financial market shocks, it affects household wealth, savings, and consumption; third, it causes supply-side disruptions that in turn negatively impact the supply chains and demand for labour leading to increased unemployment and economic hardships. These impacts, working together, can create a vicious cycle that exacerbates the economic downturn caused by the pandemic. We note one fundamental feature of the situation with COVID-19: its impact on the labor market was largely determined by the actions of governments that introduced quarantines and other restrictive measures. At the same time, there were considerable efforts to support businesses and population.

Concerning the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the BRICS labor markets, first of all we need to assess the influence of lockdowns and closures on the amounts of working time. The ILO has been collecting the necessary data and built the model presented below. As it does not provide data on individual countries, we will consider the available information about country groups. At the beginning of the pandemic, in the first quarter (1Q) of 2020, the loss of the working hours in the BRICS countries was higher than in G7, but thanks to the measures undertaken by the BRICS governments the situation started to improve in the 2Q of 2020 and further on; as a result the losses of working hours in the BRICS countries were lower than those in G7. In 2Q and 3Q, the numbers of working hours in the BRICS and G7 countries leveled off and then returned to almost the pre-pandemic level.

The fluctuations of the trend coincide with the so-called waves of the pandemic.

Graph 1 below shows the lag between the global losses in the working hours and those in the BRICS countries.

The pandemic has also affected the labor force participation rate of the BRICS countries. The drop in the labor force participation rate was most visible in 2020 compared to 2019. Further on, in 2021 and 2022, the labor force participation rate was still declining in Russia and China, while in Brazil, India and South Africa, after the 2020’s drop, the rate resumed its increase following the general trend registered in the world in 2021. In the USA, the labor force participation rate dynamics was similar to that in Russia and China, i.e. it continued its decline (see Table 3 below).

The drop in the labor force participation rate should not be attributed solely to the COVID-19 pandemic. Population ageing and other demographic and economic factors had all been in place before the pandemic affected the labor force participation rates in the BRICS countries. Still, for the years in question, the influence of the pandemic was probably decisive. Some of those who faced difficulties in finding employment, either for a short or long time, stopped looking for jobs and dropped out of the labor force during the pandemic lockdowns. Women, youth and other population groups who have higher risk of losing their jobs in times of crises were also contributing to the decrease in the labor force participation rates during the COVID-related crisis, by temporarily dropping out of the labor force.

The trend of the BRICS countries’ unemployment rate is similar to the trend of the world unemployment rate. In 2020 unemployment increased everywhere but in 2021-2022 it began to fall. The exception is South Africa where unemployment continues to rise. Both the world and BRICS countries have not so far returned to the pre-crisis levels of unemployment and the uncertain world economic situation makes any predictions about the time of possible return to the pre-COVID-19 levels rather unreliable.

The world experience has shown that the interaction between entrepreneurs, government and trade unions in the implementation of measures to support the labor market during a pandemic gives positive results (Brandl, 2021, Kövér, 2021). Such interaction was carried out with varying degrees of intensity and success, but showed the possibility of joint action to resolve complex issues covering all spheres of public life.

The first confirmed COVID-19 case in Brazil was reported on 26 February, 2020. Among BRICS countries, Brazil, as of 1 December, 2022 (Worldometer, 2022a), had the second highest number of COVID-19 cases and the highest number of fatalities.

To mitigate the impact of COVID-19, in 2020 the authorities announced a series of economic, employment and income support measures. Emergency measures were included in a separate (so-called ‘war’) 2020 budget, not bound by the provisions of Brazil’s Fiscal Responsibility Law and the constitutional golden rule. (IMF, 2022b)

Informal and own-account workers were among most affected by the pandemic, while salaried workers experienced lower loss of labour income and quicker job recovery. Employment and income support policies were to a large extent focused on the most affected groups. Two programs were implemented: Emergency Employment Assistance and Emergency Employment Benefit (BEM).

Emergency Employment Assistance program was aimed at provision of cash transfers to informal and low-income workers. A R$ 600,00 direct transfer was provided in 2020-2021 to all eligible citizens matching the following requirements: 1) over 18 years of age; 2) not formally salaried; 3) not receiving public pensions; 4) per capita family income below 1⁄2 minimum wage or total family income below 3 minimum wages. A total of 68 million people or 32,1% of the Brazilian population became direct beneficiaries of this program. (E. A. de Oliveira, et al. 2022)

Emergency Employment Benefit (BEM) program combined a shortened day work benefits and a furlough scheme. The participants of the program were workers who signed an agreement with employer to reduce work time or temporary suspend work contract, with income maintenance. In 2020 the maximum length of the benefit payment was up to 8 months and in 2021 it was reduced to up to 4 months.

Reposition rate was based on the definitions used for unemployment insurance (100% percent for workers receiving minimum wage to R$ 1813,03). In case of 25% time reduction, workers received 75% of their wage plus 25% benefit (in accordance with unemployment benefit calculus). In case of 50% time reduction, workers received 50% of their wage plus 50% benefit (in accordance with unemployment benefit calculus). In case of 70% time reduction workers received 30% of their wage plus 70% benefit (in accordance with unemployment benefit calculus). Workers on zero hour contracts in 2020 received R$ 600 from the government.

The program envisaged that participating workers could not be dismissed while in the program and that they received a provisional employment guarantee for the same period (companies were fined if they dismissed the worker during the period). It was also envisaged that for companies with gross revenue under 4.8 million the government would pay 100% of the benefit and for companies with gross revenue over 4.8 million it would pay 70% of the benefit and companies would pay 30% salary. (Brazil Ministry of Labour and Social Security, 2020)

As per the available data from April 2020 to August 2021, more than 1,5 million employers had participated in the program and more than 10 million workers benefited from it. (World Bank, 2020)

The employment and income support measures undertaken by Brazilian government during the COVID-19 pandemic, included temporary income support to vulnerable households – cash transfers to informal and low-income workers (Emergency Assistance program); benefits to workers with reduced worktime - partial compensation to furloughed workers (Emergency Employment Benefits program); the 13th pension payment to retirees; expanding the Bolsa Familia program with the inclusion of over 1 million more beneficiaries; temporary tax breaks. Public banks expanded credit lines for businesses and households, with a focus on maintaining working capital (credit lines add up to 4.5 percent of GDP), and the government had backed over 1 percent of GDP in credit lines to SMEs and micro-businesses. (IMF, 2022) Most measures expired at the end of 2020, but the Emergency Aid, employment support program, and credit support to SMEs were renewed in the second quarter of 2021.

As a result of these measures, the labor force participation rate stopped falling and started to rise in 2022; conversely, the unemployment rate began to decrease in 2022 after the severe COVID-19 situation in 2020-2021.

The first COVID-19 cases in Russia were reported on January 31, 2020. The government’s response to the pandemic was comprehensive, aimed at practically all groups of population. Businesses, too, were given support from the government, especially SME, self-employed (own-account) persons and individual entrepreneurs. Health workers were provided with financial support: more than 290 thousand medical and related workers received presidential incentive payments for performing particularly important work. Payments were also made to more than 400 thousand people working with the risk groups. Those who became infected while helping patients with COV.-19, could get appropriate insurance payments. Over a million people who lost their jobs after March 1, 2020 had increased unemployment benefits. The Government also extended all measures of supporting the unemployed to more than 13,000 individual entrepreneurs who were forced to close their businesses after 1 March, 2020 giving them the maximum benefit in the amount of the minimum wage. Small and medium-sized businesses from the most affected industries were supported by presidential grants. For those whose incomes fell by more than a third, banks granted deferrals on loans. Loans for paying wages were issued at zero percent. Under this program, banks made about 40 thousand loan agreements for a total amount of about 93 billion roubles. Since 1 June, 2020 the Government has launched another loan program with write-offs, provided that the company retains most of its employees.

These measures concerned not only small and medium-sized businesses, but also large companies from the affected industries. An important step was the recapitalization of regional guarantee and microfinance organizations, which helped to expand SME assistance programs at the regional level. The Government exempted individual entrepreneurs and some of small and medium-sized businesses from rent payments for state and municipal property, saving them about 7 billion rubles. For those who rented private real estate, they set requirements for the conditions of deferral. Some entrepreneurs found themselves in an even more difficult situation when they were issued penalties for early termination of lease agreements. To resolve this issue, business-protecting amendments were promptly made to the legislation; according to these, small and medium-sized businesses from the affected industries could unilaterally terminate the contract without penalties if the landlord did not agree to reduce or soften the terms of the lease.

The so called system-forming enterprises certainly required special attention. They are Russia’s largest employers providing jobs for more than 6 million people, whose activities have an impact on a quarter of the Russian economy. Therefore, the government constantly monitored the financial condition of such enterprises and used a whole set of measures to support them. About 139 billion roubles were allocated to the program of concessional lending to cover their working capital needs.

The adopted measures were intended to reduce business costs as much as possible and prevent financial collapse of all types of businesses and households’ failures. The government announced a moratorium on almost all inspections, extending it to medium-sized companies and non-profit organizations. The necessary checks were moved to a remote format and this practice is likely to be continued. The payment of 5 thousand rubles for each child under the age of seven helped families survive, as it provided them with a certain income. This money reached the parents of almost 13 million children, or more than 90 percent of the total number of recipients. Moreover, payments were made to the parents of another 544 thousand children, comprising those who had not received the lump-sum payments in the summer of 2020 and those whose children were born after July 1 2020. From 1 June, 2020, a monthly payment was introduced for children of 3-7 years of age. The benefit accrued starting from 1 January, 2020; in June, citizens received benefits for six months of 2020. The payments targeted families with an average per capita income below the subsistence level. Initially, the sum of the benefit equaled the amount of half of the children’s regional subsistence level; it covered 4 million 750 thousand children. For this payment, the budget allocated almost 213 billion roubles.

Russia’s National Plan for Economic Recovery (Government of the Russian Federation, 2020) was first adopted in April 2020 and later updated several times in response to changing dynamics of the pandemic. Under the plan, the government provides direct payments to families with children, but most of government support takes the form of tax breaks, subsidies, relaxing administrative regulations, subsidized preferential loans and other indirect measures. The government channeled funds to 15 sectors that suffered most during the pandemic. These funds helped protect 6.7 million jobs, including 5.3 million in small and medium enterprises (SMEs), which were more exposed to the risks associated with the pandemic. The Russian stimulus package amounted to 4–4.5% of GDP in 2020.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, special effort was made to ensure the rights of workers working remotely. Such format was widespread during the lockdown period. Although the Russian Labor Code originally had provisions concerning remote employment, the reality of the pandemic required new rules for remote work. Amendments to the Labor Code of the Russian Federation concerning the regulation of remote work and temporary transfer of an employee to remote work on the initiative of the employer in exceptional cases were adopted by Federal Law² (dated December 8, 2020, No. 407-FZ) and came into force on 1 January, 2021.

This law extended the possibilities of organizing remote work. Remote work now is to be stipulated in the employment contract or an agreement added to the employment contract and can be performed on either a permanent or temporary basis (continuously for 6 months or periodically, when remote work alternates with work at a stationary workplace). Only for the period of exceptional cases and circumstances (natural or man-made disasters, industrial accidents, fires, floods, earthquakes, epidemics or other exceptional cases that endanger the life or normal living conditions of the entire population or part of the population) remote work can be temporarily performed in accordance with local legislation and a regulatory act adopted by the employer. At the end of this period, the employer is obliged to provide the employee with the previous work specified in the employment contract, and the employee is obliged to start performing it. Interaction between the remote employee and employer can be carried out by exchanging electronic documents using an electronic signature or in another form defined in the collective agreement and employment contract.

Other measures were also taken to protect the rights and incomes of employees. Unemployment benefits and the minimum amount of temporary disability benefits were increased, which made it possible to support the workers (mainly young people) who had little insurance experience and low earnings. Since 1 January, 2021, the temporary provision on the calculation of disability benefits has been transformed into a permanent one by Federal Law No. 255-FZ of 29.12.2006 “On Compulsory social Insurance in case of temporary disability and in connection with maternity”³. (Russian Federal Law, 2006)

The measures taken in 2020-2021 made it possible to prevent a sharp drop in the incomes of the population caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and helped to support families with children.

The Government had provided support to businesses, primarily small and medium-sized enterprises.

At first, the support measures were envisaged for comparatively short periods of time, but in some cases the periods were extended. The small and medium-sized businesses in the most affected industries were able to delay the payment of taxes and insurance contributions to state extra-budgetary funds for the periods of I-II quarters of 2020. Later it was decided to completely write off taxes and insurance contributions due in the second quarter of 2020 for all sole proprietors and SME organizations from the affected industries.

Small and medium-sized firms in the affected industries were given direct gratuitous subsidies to pay salaries at the rate of 12,130 rubles per employee per month. Social insurance payments were reduced from 30% to 15% for all SMEs, in cases when payments to employees exceeded the minimum wage, which was a significant relief of the overall tax burden on entrepreneurs.

Preferential lending programs were introduced for SMEs, large companies from affected industries and system-forming organizations (according to estimates, the total amount of loans subsidized under these programmes was 1.4 trillion rubles by the end of August 2022).

The SMEs in affected industries renting the federal property were exempt from paying rent for 2020. Decisions have been made regarding commercial leases to support landlords who provided rental benefits.

All these measures made it possible to prevent an explosive increase in poverty as a result of the pandemic. The measures that were taken had a significant impact on the preservation of employment and development of entrepreneurship even in the difficult pandemic time. In total, there were more than 4.5 million facts of state support over 2020-2021 in the amount of about 600 billion rubles.

Furthermore, over the past two years, the Government halved the number of control measures against enterprises and entrepreneurs and introduced a moratorium on both scheduled and unscheduled inspections from 10 March, 2022 till the end of the year. It applies to all Russian companies, not only to small and medium-sized businesses as it was during the pandemic, except, of course, when it comes to the safety of life and health of people. Another, recently adopted, measure was a decree on a three-year moratorium on inspections of IT companies. Russian IT companies are exempt from scheduled inspections conducted by state and municipal control organizations for three years. (Decree as of 24 of March 2022 , №448)

It is important to note that short-term emergency pandemic recovery measures co-exist with the long-term strategic goals for 2030 as stated in the June 2020 Presidential decree. These goals fall into five major categories: 1) protecting the population, health, and welfare of people; 2) opportunities for self-realization and talent development; 3) comfortable and safe living environment; 4) efficient work, and successful entrepreneurship; and 5) digital transformation. Many of these objectives have remained unchanged since 2018, when the long-term goals for 2024 were set by the president (President of the Russian Federation, 2018). The 2024 goals are to be achieved through 13 “National Projects”, i.e. a series of ambitious programs, run until 2024 with approximately US$350 billion in overall planned funding.

In fact the development and implementation of the anti-COVID-19 measures to protect labor market in Russia contributed to the implementation of the long-term national development objectives and such interconnection increased the effectiveness of the emergency measures.

The first case of COVID-19 was reported in Kerala in January, 2020. (Andrews, M. A., et al., 2020) India has the highest number of registered COVID-19 cases among the BRICS countries and the second after Brazil number of fatalities. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic Indian Government had provided fiscal stimulus and income support to population and businesses.

As India’s economy is characterized by the high level of informality, significant support was given to street vendors. Prime Minister Street Vendor’s Atma Nirbhar Nidhi Scheme (Government of India, 2020) was launched on June 01, 2020 to grant working capital loans to Street Vendors, vending in urban areas, to resume their businesses, which were hurt adversely due to COVID-19 induced lockdown.

Government of India credited 12% of employer’s and 12% of employee’s share of contributions to the Employees’ Provident Fund Organization (EPFO) (Ministry of Labor and Employment, Government of India, 2022a) for two years for the establishments having up to 100 employees, with 90% of such employees earning less than Rs. 15000. This helped in protecting employment in EPFO registered establishments in the post COVID-19 period.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, this fund extended multiple levels of benefits to both employers and employees and provided non-refundable advances of 75% of outstanding balance or 3 months wages to EPFO members – 5.3 million benefited, Rs. 135.87 billion were disbursed.

Aatmanirbhar Bharat Rojgar Yojana (Government of India, 2022b) has been launched in October, 2020 as part of Atmanirbhar Bharat package 3.0 to incentivize employers for creation of new employment along with social security benefits and restoration of lost employment during COVID-19 pandemic. This scheme, implemented through the EPFO, seeks to reduce the financial burden on the employers and encourage them to hire more workers. The terminal date for registration of beneficiaries had been extended from 30.06.2021 to 31.03.2022.

The Indian government launched the Garib Kalyan Rojgar Abhiyaan (GKRA) for 125 days on 20 June, 2020 to boost employment and livelihood opportunities for returnee migrant workers and similarly affected persons including youth in rural areas, in 116 selected districts across 6 States of India.

The unemployment benefit under the Atal Beemit Vyakti Kalyan Yojana, implemented by the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (ESIC), had been enhanced to 50% from 25% of the average wage, payable up to 90 days, along with easing the eligibility conditions to claim the benefit. ESIC introduced easier terms for employers of depositing Employees’ State Insurance Corporation contributions for Feb-June, 2020.

Government encouraged various projects involving substantial investment and public expenditure on the schemes like Prime Minister’s Employment Generation Programme, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Grameen Kaushalya Yojana, Deendayal Antodaya Yojana-National Urban Livelihoods Mission and others.

Government increased Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGS) wage to Rs. 202 a day from Rs. 182 to benefit nearly 136.2 million families.

Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojana (PMMY) is being implemented by the Government inter alia, for facilitating self-employment. With PMMY collateral, free loans up to Rs. 1 million, are extended to micro/small business enterprises and to individuals to enable them to set up a business or expand their business activities.

In addition, Reserve Bank of India and Government of India introduced measures to inject liquidity in the economy to sustain the market and raise the level of employment.

The Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship (MSDE) implemented a special program for the fresh skilling (Short Term Training) and upskilling (Recognition of Prior Learning) of the returnee migrant workers impacted by COVID-19 under its flagship scheme Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY) to support the GKRA. This special programme has covered 116 districts of 6 state. MSDE supported by District Administration had undertaken skill mapping of the returnee migrants and identified the beneficiaries for the training under PMKVY.

The flagship programs of the Government such as Make in India, Digital India, Smart City Mission, Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation, Housing for All and Industrial corridors and Production-Linked Incentive Scheme aim to generate productive and sustainable employment opportunities. (Ministry of Labour & Employment. 2022)

The Government also paid attention to Technology for Ease of living and Doing Business. E-Shram Portal, Shram-suvidha Portal, NCS Portal were created to support nation-wide labour surveys. To introduce listed measures Wage Code, IR Code, Code on OSH, and Code on Social Security were adjusted.

To ensure food security for vulnerable and migrant workers 0,5 kg of free food grains per month per person were provided and approximately 80 million migrant workers were covered.

The government promoted the “One Nation One Ration Card” Scheme enabling migrant workers and their families to access PDS benefits from any fair price shop in the country (Economic Survey, 2020-21).

Direct Cash Transfer Support was also provided. As a result, 420 million individuals, including 200 million female account holders were given ex-gratia of Rs. 500 per month during April-June 2020, and cash transfer of Rs. 1000 was provided to 30 million widows and disabled beneficiaries amounting to Rs. 28.14 Billion.

Livelihood Assistance and Employment Generation programs included MGNREGS that provided significant enhancement in budgetary allocation made to meet additional demand. MGNREGS Wage Rate was revised in April 2020 to benefit nearly 130 million families. In FY 2021-22, over 80.7 million individuals were provided with work.

The Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Rojgar Abhiyan (PM-GKRA) was launched in the migrant districts of six states to create jobs for the returning migrants through building public infrastructure. PM-GKRA generated 508 million person-days of employment as of July 2021 with a total expenditure of INR 393 billion.

The Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana provided financial assistance to registered construction workers from Welfare Fund. 31 states/UTs provided cash benefits, ranging from INR 1000 to INR 6000 per month to around 20 million construction workers – Rs. 49.74 billion was disbursed.

The anti-COVID-19 pandemic measures once again proved the importance of social security to workers and the need to protect migrants and other vulnerable and disadvantaged groups of population. While India continues to focus on Atmanirbharta (general self-sufficiency) COVID-19 revealed the necessity to move towards formalizing the informal workers.

As a result of the measures to support labour market and employment, the labor force participation rate resumed its growth in 2021-2022 after the COVID-induced drop in 2020; conversely, the unemployment rate started falling after the 2020’s significant increase, almost reaching the pre-COVID-19 level in 2022.

A pneumonia outbreak in Wuhan (China) was registered in December 2019. (WHO, 2020b) Early in January 2020, Chinese authorities determined that it was caused by a novel coronavirus COVID-19. The government promoted “Zero Tolerance” policy against COVID-19 and imposed strict containment measures (Shangguan, Wang, 2022).

The COVID-19 short term impact on China’s economy and labor market was severe. At an early stage of the epidemic the number of new jobs declined dramatically, and the pressure on total employment was high. The risk of unemployment became particularly acute. The rural-to-urban migrant workers and university graduates were among the employment groups which suffered most. Wholesale and retail, accommodation, catering and tourism were among the most affected sectors.

The government introduced a combination of policies to mitigate the consequences of the pandemic. Active financial policy was combined with securing employment and promoting consumption; prudent and moderately easy monetary policy helped maintain exports activities.

Active financial policy aimed to reduce the deficit-to-GDP ratio which rose from 2.8% in 2019 to 3.6% in 2020 and 3.2% in 2021. The fiscal revenues of the government at all levels declined by 2.6 trillion yuan in 2020 and 1.1 trillion yuan in 2021. (National Bureau of Statistics of China, 2022) The government expanded procurement programmes and introduced consumption vouchers with consumption subsidies. In early 2020, the government had cut wages four times and reformed interest rates. Credit expansion and targeted support policies assured the survival of small enterprises in rural areas. Firms were receiving assistance, export credit insurance and increasing export credit support.

To maintain employment and encourage enterprises to create more jobs a set of measures was implemented, including:

• support to workers wishing to start their own businesses;
• promoting flexible employment and new forms of employment;
• promoting the employment of university graduates;
• employment assistance to those having difficulty finding jobs;
• employment assistance to people out of poverty;
• strengthening public employment services;
• active prevention of unemployment risks.

All these measures resulted in the revival of economic growth and employment. Economic growth had gradually recovered since the second quarter of 2020, with the annual GDP reaching 101.6 trillion Yuan ($14.7 trillion), an increase of 2.3%. (The State Council of the People’s Republic of China, 2021) In 2021, China’s GDP totaled 114.4 trillion Yuan ($17.7 trillion), with the nominal GDP growth of 12.8% and real GDP growth of 8.1%. (National Bureau of Statistics of China, 2022)

Innovation-driven development continues to gather steam, with the digital economy accounting for 38.6 % of GDP in 2020 and over 40 % in 2021.

Visible success was achieved in poverty alleviation. In 2020, 98.99 million rural residents were lifted out of poverty, and the per capita income of rural households grew by over 6.9% nationwide (Shu, D., 2022).

Yet, the labor force participation rate continues to decrease in China even though the unemployment rate began to fall. These effects could be attributed to the very strict anti-COVID-19 policies imposed by China.

South Africa reported its first confirmed COVID-19 case on March 5, 2020. (The National Institute for Communicable Diseases, 2020) Soon after the pandemic had hit the country, the government of South Africa designed and implemented a well-coordinated COVID-19 response framework. (South African Government, 2022a) To cushion the COVID-19 impact, it introduced social relief and economic support package, which included monetary policy and regulatory tools to manage the desired positive impact on the economy together with direct social benefits to citizens. The monetary policy included measures that were aimed at supporting the businesses and labor market:

• lowering interest rates;
• short-term loans, revolving credit facilities and bank guarantees by Industrial Funding Package to provide firms with liquidity;
• Loan guarantees for small business (less than R300 million turnover);
• Tax relief and deferrals, including Employment Tax Incentive, Skills Development Levy;
• Wage Protection through Temporary Employer/ Employee Relief scheme;
• Regulatory exemptions, e.g. Competition Act exemptions for sectors like Tourism and Retail Property;
• Funding to small businesses, including spaza shops and other businesses in the informal economy.

Direct social benefits to citizens included measures like:

• Increased amounts for those already receiving social grants from Government, e.g. Child grant for children from vulnerable and qualifying families, old-age grant for pensioners with no other source of income, disability grant etc.;
• Introduction of COVID-19 Social Relief of Distress grant: a new grant providing adults with R350 per month to cushion them from the adverse effects of the lock down. The following criteria were to be met in order to be eligible: a person must be over 18 years old; unemployed; not receiving any income or grant; not qualify for or be receiving unemployment insurance; not receiving any student financial aid from the government; and not living in government funded accommodation.

On 26 March 2020 the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF), an entity of the Department of Employment and Labour, established the Covid-19 Temporary Employer-Employee Relief Scheme (Covid-19 TERS) (Ministry of Labor and Employment, South Africa, 2020).

The Scheme was primarily formed to save jobs and ease the financial burden on businesses but most importantly, on their vulnerable workers.

COVID-19 TERS became one of the most effective monetary government interventions as it constituted 29% of the 41% stimulus package successfully disbursed by 31 March 2021. As of end of March, 2022 the UIF has disbursed R64 billion to 5,7 million workers, surpassing initial budget by R24 billion. It should be noted that a prerequisite for the successful result was a tripartite collaboration of the government with trade unions and businesses. (South African Government, 2022b)

All these interventions aimed to assist businesses that ceased operation in keeping afloat, help unemployed individuals and those who were employed but unable to work under lockdown. While implementing these measures, the government made several amendments and corrections, such as:

• Amendments to the TERS, which had been focused on UIF-registered businesses and workers and excluded informal workers and needed to be extended to the workers not registered for UIF. (Department of Employment and Labor, South Africa, 2021)
• Amendments to Social Relief of Distress grant as it had previously excluded unemployed mothers receiving Child grant, and further amendment to this grant extending its time frame.

The National Income Dynamics Study – Coronavirus Rapid Mobile Survey (NIDS-CRAM) estimates that the Social Relief of Distress grant intervention reached about 12% of South African adults who had government social grant for unemployment in 2020; this percentage would have increased with extended group of people and extended time frame. (NIDS CRAM, 2020)

Government policies resulted in the revival of labor force participation growth. However, the rate of unemployment in South Africa remains high, which is determined by several factors, including the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and, to a large extent, slow economic growth and generally unfavourable economic situation.

The first case of COVID-19 in the US was reported on January 20, 2020. (Worldometer, 2022b) Since then, there have been 101,760,149 confirmed COVID-19 cases and 1,112,970 confirmed COVID-19 related deaths (as of December 19^th, 2022). Despite wide vaccination efforts that covered around 80% of the US population (CDC, 2022), COVID-19 remains an acute concern for the government.

Most experts agree in the US, the response to COVID-19 was insufficient in the most crucial time at the beginning of the pandemic; many of them argue that the weak response was caused by the historic neglect and underfunded state and local public health systems. (Weber L., et al., 2020) Some link the results of the first years of the pandemic to “social murder”, as it describes the lack of political attention to social determinants and inequities that exacerbated the pandemic. (Abbasi K., 2021) Scholars discuss the ethical side of the US response to the pandemic, assessing the effectiveness of their utilitarian. (Herron T., Manuel T., 2022)

The COVID-19 public health crisis and the resulting economic crisis have created a variety of challenges for families across the country, changing the way US citizens live and work.

The Paycheck Protection Program, part of the ongoing Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, also known as the CARES Act (March 27, 2020) is providing essential assistance for small businesses, as it covers their liquidity needs enabling them to pay up to eight weeks of payroll costs, including benefits, and meet the rental, utilities and mortgage interest payments. This program authorizes up to $659 billion toward job retention and certain other expenses.

One of the latest efforts to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 in the US was the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (March 11, 2021), also known as the COVID-19 Stimulus Package or American Rescue Plan, a US$1.9 trillion economic stimulus bill that aims to speed up the recovery from the economic and health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing recession. (U.S. Department of the Treasury, 2021).

A report made after the six months of implementation of the plan states that over 3 million jobs have been created since the American Rescue Plan was signed into law, with job creation averaging more than 765,000 over the last three months.

The American Rescue Plan includes several programs aimed at mitigating the impact of COVID-19 by providing support to families and workers, small businesses, state, local and tribal governments and industry. Programs that support the labor market include the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) program that provides support for businesses and premium pay for essential workers, along with other assistance.

The American Rescue Plan resulted in the waiver of some federal taxes on unemployment benefits for those who lost work due to the COVID-19 crisis, as well as provision of direct relief payments by The Treasury Department, the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to the qualifying individuals.

Studies, however, show that most of the primary responses to the COVID-19 pandemic were only short-term, while the economic and labour crises triggered by the pandemic are taking much longer to overcome. (W. Bartik, et al., 2020) The American pandemic-caused recession is unique owing to its special feature: it targets mostly low-wage services and retail sectors of the economy, and the young, less educated, and non-white workers who have lost work. Women, too, were disproportionally affected by the economic crises caused by COVID-19. (Groshen, 2020)

The hospitality industry was among those that suffered most, being, at the same time, one of the largest employers. In 2019, hospitality industry provided 9.5 million jobs, accounting for 2.9% GDP. (National Travel and Tourism Office, 2020) The unemployment rate in the sector peaked in 2020 with 39.3% and has been on the steady decline since. However, one of the recent studies found that economically and statistically significant declines in employment and the number of small businesses operating in the hospitality industry are associated with prior business closure policies. (Huang A., et al., 2020)

The new National COVID-19 Preparedness Plan (May 2022) (The White House, 2022) designed by the Biden administration puts a keen focus on preventing further pandemic-caused economic and educational shutdowns. Safety of the workers and continuous economic growth are seen as major priorities.

Using such indicators as labor force participation rate and unemployment rate when assessing the results of the USA polices to mitigate the labor market consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, we see that labor force participation rate has not returned to the pre-COVID-19 levels; in a similar way, after the steep rise in 2020 the unemployment rate started decreasing but is still higher than in the pre-pandemic 2019.