Recruitment, outstaffing and outsourcing are used almost interchangeably in the staffing market, and companies regularly end up buying the wrong one. The difference is not marketing: it is about who employs the worker, who assigns their tasks and what exactly you are paying for.
Three arrangements in one table
| Parameter | Recruitment | Outstaffing | Outsourcing |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who is the employer | You | The provider | The contractor |
| Who assigns tasks | You | You | The contractor |
| What you pay for | A worker who started | A man-month | Completed volume |
| Consumes your permitted share | Yes | No | No |
| HR records and reporting | Yours | The provider’s | The contractor’s |
| Immigration liability | Yours | The provider’s | The contractor’s |
| Flexibility on headcount | Low | High | High |
| Legal basis | Labour Code, general rules | Ch. 53.1 Labour Code | Civil Code, works or services contract |
Which is cheaper when
Recruitment wins with an even load and an unused permitted share: you pay no intermediary margin and the worker is entirely yours. Over a full year it is the cheapest option if you genuinely need the people all year.
Outstaffing wins in two cases: when the share is used up and you simply cannot put people on payroll, and when headcount swings. You pay for a period rather than a permanent position, and replacement, sourcing and reporting sit with the provider.
Outsourcing wins when a scope of work can be separated and measured: loading, cleaning, picking, ancillary work. You stop paying for people being present and start paying for output.
A simple test for choosing. If you can measure the scope in tonnes, metres or pallets — take outsourcing. If you cannot, but you need hands inside your own process and the share is used up — outstaffing. If the share is free and the load is even — recruitment onto your payroll.
What the law says
Agency labour has been prohibited in Russia since 1 January 2016 by Article 56.1 of the Labour Code. What the market still calls outstaffing is legally the provision of workers (personnel) and is governed by Chapter 53.1. Only a private employment agency accredited by Rostrud may enter into such contracts, and accreditation requires share capital of at least 1 million roubles, no tax arrears and a qualified director.
The practical implication for a client: check the provider’s accreditation in the public register before signing. Without it the contract risks recharacterisation and the workers being treated as yours, with all the consequences for your permitted share and immigration liability.
Three expensive mistakes
First: calling outstaffing "outsourcing" in the contract while still paying per man-hour. Inspectors look at substance, not labels. If payment follows people rather than measurable output, the contract reads as provision of personnel — and requires accreditation.
Second: outsourcing a scope but managing the contractor’s people directly. If the crew reports to your supervisor and works your shift pattern, the relationship gets recharacterised as employment.
Third: not recalculating the permitted share after the 2026 cut. Construction is 50%, not the old 80%. Companies still working to the old figure find out on inspection: the fine under Part 1 of Article 18.17 is 800,000 to 1,000,000 roubles, or suspension of operations for up to 90 days.
If you are not sure which arrangement is yours, send us your activity code, region and headcount. We will calculate the limit and tell you which option is cheaper in your case.