PCP
The second stage cannot justify waiting
The nursing initiative was accepted in 2021; its first stage has operated since 1 July 2024. On 21 May 2025, the Federal Council submitted its second-stage message on working conditions and professional development to Parliament. Legislative proposals are not already applicable uniform rights.
Employers and authorities nevertheless have existing powers over rosters, training, agreements and assignment funding. The PCP calls for their use now. Waiting for a federal rule cannot justify permanently vacant posts or unpredictable schedule changes.
Rest must be possible to plan
Repeated roster changes shift uncertainty into private life. No team can permanently rely on staff surrendering rest. The PCP proposes early schedules, explicit change rules and appropriate compensation, negotiated with staff representatives under the applicable framework.
Predictability requires funded cover. Otherwise an absence may turn a roster promise into reduced provision. Institutions need replacement teams or shared arrangements suited to their duties, with professionals familiar with the service. Someone merely present but unfamiliar cannot immediately replace all missing work.
Workload is more than a patient count
Identical staff and patient numbers can involve different workloads. Dependency, treatment, home journeys and interruptions change requirements. The PCP supports professional assessment of workload and qualifications rather than an invented uniform national ratio.
Administration should be examined by usefulness. Removing duplication creates time; removing an essential handover damages care. Teams should identify unnecessary formalities, help choose tools and check whether simplification actually reduces work.
Training requires available supervision
Students and new graduates need support. Counting their presence as immediately equivalent to experienced production burdens the remaining team. Supervision time must appear in staffing and budgets.
Professional development should allow advancement without leaving care. Advanced responsibilities require training, a defined scope and corresponding pay, rather than more tasks without time or recognition. Pathways must remain accessible to part-time staff.
Open a route back
Returning may require refresher training, mentoring and a gradual restart. The PCP proposes paid pathways involving employers, education providers and competent authorities. Inviting people back without changing the conditions behind their departure limits effectiveness.
Return should be voluntary and matched to skills needing renewal. It does not replace improvements for existing teams. Funding recruitment while neglecting those who stay creates unfairness and fuels turnover.
Funders must recognise necessary costs
The FOPH notes that efficient, transparent additional nursing-home and home-care costs can fall under cantonal or municipal residual financing in the present system. Employer responsibility does not remove the responsibility of authorities setting assignment resources.
Agreements should examine cover, supervision and coordination. They can require justified spending and auditable accounts, but should not impose a price incompatible with expected work and then blame providers for departures or missing services.
Assess retention without rewarding immobility
Monitoring distinguishes turnover, occupational exit, health and satisfaction. Changing employer is not automatically leaving nursing; low turnover does not prove good conditions if alternatives are absent. Evaluation must combine evidence and listen to staff.
Success means teams able to welcome trainees, take rest and deliver care without permanent emergency operation. The PCP supports negotiated, funded commitments. Retention is a public capacity to build, not a moral obligation imposed on nurses.