Public Safety Telecommunicator Job Reclassification

In 2016, the Congressional NextGen 9-1-1 Caucus Co-Chairs – Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Senator Richard Burr (R-NC), Representative Anna Eshoo (D-CA), and Representative John Shimkus (R-IL) – sent a bipartisan letter to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) urging OMB to revise the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) to accurately represent the complex and life-saving nature of the work performed by 9-1-1 professionals.

In 2016, OMB published a 2nd Federal Register Notice requesting comments on a review committee’s recommendations for SOC revision. Unfortunately, this Notice did not include APCO’s recommendations. The reason given on the SOC website for rejecting the Co-Chairs’ and APCO’s recommendations is that

“The work performed is that of a dispatcher, not a first responder. Most dispatchers are precluded from administering actual care, talking someone through procedures, or providing advice. Moving the occupation to the Protective Services major group is not appropriate and separating them from the other dispatchers would be confusing. Also, dispatchers are often located in a separate area from first responders and have a different supervisory chain.”

APCO strongly disagreed with this reasoning and immediately took action to leverage the full strength of its membership and every available resource to ensure Public Safety Telecommunicators receive the recognition they deserve, including:

• Holding a webinar soon after OMB’s interim decision, and later a session at APCO’s annual conference on the reclassification process and how members can get involved;
• Creating an online resource, which includes sample comments and a portal to facilitate submitting formal comments and contacting members of Congress;
• Meeting with the federal office managing the SOC revision to better understand their reasoning, convey the importance of this issue and provide additional information to educate OMB;
• Asking APCO members and their colleagues to submit comments to OMB explaining how they protect the public and first responders and to contact their elected officials to seek support;
• Seeking support from leaders on Capitol Hill;
• Conducting targeted outreach to APCO chapter leaders, agency managers and directors, Registered Public-Safety Leaders (RPLs), APCO Institute graduates, and other national-level organizations to provide information and get them involved; and
• Requesting additional information from OMB on the basis for their interim decision.

The reclassification effort also got a boost from Congresswoman Norma Torres, a member of the NextGen 9-1-1 Caucus and former Public Safety Telecommunicator, who sent a letter to OMB describing the protective work performed by Public Safety Telecommunicators and urging reclassification.

After conducting additional research and incorporating the detailed information about the protective nature of the work performed by Public Safety Telecommunicators provided by the membership, APCO submitted comments in response to OMB’s second solicitation of public comments on the SOC.

APCO filed formal comments that provided extensive explanation and examples describing the “protective” nature of the work performed by 9-1-1 professionals, building on information submitted by APCO members.

In December 2016, there were two significant contributions of additional support for reclassifying public safety telecommunicators.

First, Rear Admiral (ret.) David Simpson, Chief of the FCC’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, submitted a letter of support to the SOC Policy Committee.

Second, APCO supplied the following information in response to questions posed by OMB.

1. How the Roles of 9-1-1 Professionals Have Evolved
   APCO submitted a brief description of how the work performed by 9-1-1 officials has transformed from a clerical role to the lifesaving and increasingly complex tasks required of Public Safety Telecommunicators. This helps explain the misconception of “dispatchers” as Office and Administrative Support Occupations and why the Protective Service Occupations category is more appropriate.
2. “Public Safety Telecommunicator” is Representative and Commonly-Used as a Title
   APCO compared job title data in 2006 and 2016, as well as survey data based on more than 3,000 responses from public safety communications professionals, to demonstrate that “Public Safety Telecommunicator” is an appropriate term for the SOC. Here are a few observations from our research:
   • Variants of “Dispatcher” (Emergency Dispatcher, Dispatcher/Communications Officer, etc.) are used in 35% of the titles (which is a decrease from 46% in 2006).
   • Variants of “Telecommunicator” (Public Safety Telecommunicator, Public Safety Communications Officer, etc.) account for 57% of the total (up from 53% since 2006).
   • We also asked a relevant question in a brief survey to our members – “Do you agree that the term “Public Safety Telecommunicators” can be used to represent 9-1-1 call takers and police, fire, and emergency medical dispatchers?”
     • 97% of respondents said “Yes.”
3. How Common It Is for Public Safety Telecommunicators to Operate in the Field
   As the SOC Policy Committee’s interim decision indicated, the physical location of the work performed is a consideration for how occupations are classified. Thus, APCO’s survey asked:
   • “Do Public Safety Telecommunicators at your agency ever operate in the field to assist with communications on scene (ex – for pre-planned events, major incidents, SWAT call-outs, etc.)?”
     • 78% said “Yes”
   • Of those who responded “No” to that question, more than half indicated that their agency is “considering policies or a training program to have Public Safety Telecommunicators operate in the field.”

On October 18, 2017, the American Heart Association sent a letter of support to OMB, pointing out how PSTs are a critical link in the cardiac arrest chain of survival.

On November 28, 2017, OMB published a final decision in the Federal Register, changing the detailed occupation name to “Public Safety Telecommunicators” but REJECTING the suggestion to reclassify them as Protective Service Occupations. Read a summary of the explanation provided with rebuttals from APCO.

In March 2019, Congresswoman Norma Torres (D-CA) and Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) introduced the Supporting Accurate Views of Emergency Services Act of 2019 (the 9-1-1 SAVES Act), a bill that would appropriately reclassify Public Safety Telecommunicators with other “Protective” occupations. An identical bill was introduced in the Senate by Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) and Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).

Since then, there have been continued efforts in the U.S. House and Senate to pass reclassification. Most recently, in 2025, bipartisan legislation to correct the classification of public safety telecommunicators was reintroduced in the U.S. House of Representatives as the 9-1-1 SAVES Act (H.R. 637) and in the U.S. Senate as the Enhancing First Response Act (S. 725), where, for the first time, it has advanced to the full Senate for consideration.

In April 2024, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel sent a letter to the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reiterating her long-standing support for reclassifying public safety telecommunicators as a protective service occupation.FCC Chairwoman Letter to OMB