911 SAVES Act: Reclassification, Status, and State Action

The 911 SAVES Act is a bipartisan bill in Congress that would reclassify the country’s roughly 105,000 public safety telecommunicators, the people who answer 911 calls, from “clerical workers” to “protective service” professionals under the federal Standard Occupational Classification system. Its full name is the Supporting Accurate Views of Emergency Services Act. The Senate passed its version, S. 725, by unanimous consent on September 10, 2025.¹ The House version, H.R. 637, has not advanced.²

What the Bill Would Change

The Bureau of Labor Statistics currently groups 911 telecommunicators under SOC code 43-5031, in the “Office and Administrative Support Occupations” category alongside receptionists and commercial dispatchers.³ The bill would direct the Office of Management and Budget to move them into the “Protective Service Occupations” group, the same broad category that covers police officers, firefighters, and correctional officers.⁴

Supporters say the clerical label reflects a much older version of the job. Modern dispatchers coach callers through CPR, talk down suicidal individuals, guide people through active shooter events, and coordinate multi-agency responses.⁴

One boundary worth stating up front: the SOC system is a statistical standard, not a wage law. APCO International has clarified that the SOC has no direct legal relationship to the Fair Labor Standards Act, so reclassification by itself would not change overtime rules or set new pay scales.⁴ Its effects would flow through data, benchmarking, and eligibility, not through automatic pay raises.

Why the Classification Matters

SOC codes shape how federal agencies collect workforce data, and that data influences pay benchmarking, grant eligibility, collective bargaining, and policy decisions at every level of government.⁵ Because dispatchers are counted with office workers, agencies find it harder to justify competitive pay, apply for public-safety-specific grants, or benchmark occupational injury and illness rates against comparable peers.

The wage figures illustrate the gap. BLS reported a 2024 median annual wage of $50,730 for public safety telecommunicators.³ Police officers, in the protective service group, earn a mean of roughly $71,390, and firefighters about $57,870.⁶

Mental health services may be the more consequential effect. In many jurisdictions, the clerical designation excludes dispatchers from publicly funded counseling, peer-support programs, and workers’ compensation coverage for post-traumatic stress that other emergency workers receive. NENA, the National Emergency Number Association, has said the classification prevents telecommunicators from being recognized as public safety employees for work-related mental health services.⁷

The context behind the push is a staffing emergency. NENA estimates that 911 centers operate with an average 30 percent staff shortage, and some report vacancy rates above 41 percent.⁸ A 2023 NENA survey found that 91 percent of dispatchers and 90 percent of supervisors reported burnout symptoms in the previous six months.⁹ Advocates argue reclassification is a precondition for the kind of pay, training, and mental health investment that could slow turnover.

Where the Bill Stands

The Senate companion, the Enhancing First Response Act (S. 725), was introduced by Senators Amy Klobuchar and Marsha Blackburn. It contains the same reclassification mandate as the House bill and adds provisions directing the FCC to study 911 access during natural disasters, look into unreported 911 outages, and report on compliance with Kari’s Law.¹⁰¹¹¹ That was the first time either chamber had approved dispatcher reclassification legislation.

The House side has been slower. Representative Norma Torres of California, the only former 911 dispatcher in Congress, and Representative Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania have introduced the bill in each Congress since 2019.¹² In the 118th Congress, the bill (H.R. 6319) cleared the House Education and Workforce Committee 42–0 on July 10, 2024, but only after an amendment from Representative Lori Chavez-DeRemer replaced the reclassification mandate with a requirement that OMB merely “consider” the change and explain any refusal to Congress within 60 days.¹³ APCO and NENA said the softened language was effectively meaningless because OMB would already be weighing the classification through its routine revision process.¹⁴ The bill never reached the House floor.

Torres reintroduced the bill as H.R. 637 on January 22, 2025. The current version would require reclassification within 30 days of enactment, bypassing OMB’s standard timeline.² As of early 2026, H.R. 637 had not advanced beyond introduction, and no committee action had been reported. For reclassification to become federal law, the House would need to pass its own bill or take up the Senate-passed version, and the two chambers would need to reconcile any differences.

Arguments Against

Opposition is quieter than support, but real. When OMB declined to reclassify dispatchers during the 2018 SOC revision, it concluded that the work performed is “that of a dispatcher, not a first responder,” noting that most dispatchers are physically separated from the emergencies they manage and answer to a different supervisory chain than field responders.⁵ OMB also said “most dispatchers are precluded from administering actual care” and that separating them from other dispatchers, such as taxi or trucking dispatchers, in the classification system “would be confusing.”¹⁵

Local governments have raised fiscal concerns. Because 911 services are funded primarily through state and local phone service fees, reclassification could create pressure for pay increases that cities and counties would absorb. The City and County of Honolulu flagged the “increased costs and complexities” of establishing and managing a new bargaining unit if dispatchers were separated from their current classification.¹⁵ Some members of Congress have also questioned using legislation to override OMB’s statistical classification process, a concern reflected in the 2024 committee amendment.

The Administrative Alternative

Even without legislation, OMB is running a routine SOC revision that could resolve the question. In June 2024, the agency identified public safety telecommunicators as a topic for public comment in the 2028 revision cycle, acknowledging that the issue “has been raised to OMB by Congress over the years.”¹⁶ The comment period closed in August 2024, drawing more than 37,500 responses. APCO and NENA both submitted formal comments in favor of reclassification.¹⁵

The Standard Occupational Classification Policy Committee is reviewing the input and will forward recommendations to OMB. The revision is intended for completion by early 2027 and implementation in 2028.¹⁷ If OMB declines this cycle, the next scheduled revision would not come until approximately 2038. That decade-long gap is a central reason legislative supporters want Congress to act rather than wait.¹⁵

State Laws Are Moving Faster

The federal classification has not changed, but more than 20 states have taken their own steps to recognize dispatchers as first responders or extend them first-responder protections. The measures vary in scope.¹⁸

California’s AB 1945, signed in September 2020, added public safety dispatchers to the state’s Emergency Services Act definition of first responders.
Texas HB 1090, signed in June 2019, added dispatchers to the state’s first responder definition.
Indiana HB 1198, signed in March 2020, designated public safety telecommunicators as first responders.
Colorado, Idaho, Minnesota, Nevada, and Oregon have extended workers’ compensation coverage for PTSD or psychological trauma to dispatchers.
Washington passed legislation in 2022 reclassifying dispatchers at government-run centers as first responders, requiring a statewide training and certification process, and enabling eligibility for improved retirement benefits. Before the law, dispatchers in some agencies had to work until age 65 for full retirement, while law enforcement and fire personnel in state plans could retire at 53.¹⁹

Senator Maria Cantwell has pointed to Washington’s training certification process and improved worker retention as evidence that the federal change would produce similar results.²⁰ Whether the federal reclassification ultimately arrives through the House, through OMB’s 2028 revision, or not at all is the open question going into the rest of the 119th Congress.

1
GovTrack. S. 725: Enhancing First Response Act
2
GovTrack. H.R. 637: 911 SAVES Act
3
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Public Safety Telecommunicators
4
APCO International. SOC Revision
5
National 911 Program. BLS Toolkit Job Description
6
Harvard Journal on Legislation. Policy Torres
7
NENA. Reclassification
8
The Current GA. 911 Call Takers Are Demoralized, Overwhelmed, and Dealing With Their Own Mental Health Woes
9
Maryland Matters. 911 Call Centers Struggle With Staffing Shortages, Mental Health Burnout
10
Senator Amy Klobuchar. Klobuchar, Blackburn Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Enhance 9-1-1 Emergency Response System
11
NENA. NENA Applauds Senate Committee Approval of 911 SAVES Act
12
Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick. Fitzpatrick, Torres Reintroduce Bipartisan Bill to Reclassify 911 Dispatchers
13
U.S. Government Publishing Office. House Report 118-692
14
APCO International. APCO and NENA Express Disappointment in Committee Passage of Modified 911 SAVES Act
15
Congress.gov. Congressional Research Service: Public Safety Telecommunicators
16
Federal Register. Standard Occupational Classification Request for Comments
17
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2028 SOC Revision
18
NENA. Reclassification Map
19
EMS1. Under New Law, Wash. Dispatchers Will Be Classified as First Responders
20
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Senate Passes National Legislation Officially Recognizing 9-1-1 Operators