New York Assembly Bill A08444

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/16/25
• Refer: 5/16/25

Caption

Relates to the establishment of a twenty-two and one-half year retirement program for members of the New York city employees' retirement system employed as emergency medical technicians and advanced emergency medical technicians and to the establishment of such program for such members who are subject to articles 11 and 15 of the retirement and social security law.

Impact

If passed, this legislation would shift retirement age and benefit structures for hundreds of EMTs in New York City. The financial implications of the bill include projected increases in employer contributions over the first 25 years, estimated at nearly $30 million in 2026 and gradually decreasing thereafter. Such adjustments are crucial as they aim to alleviate the strain on workers who often face high-stress situations. Furthermore, this bill is positioned to enhance job appeal for EMT positions, providing an incentive for long-term service and potentially improving the quality of emergency medical response in the city.

Summary

Bill A08444 proposes the establishment of a twenty-two and one-half year retirement program for emergency medical technicians (EMTs) and advanced emergency medical technicians who are members of the New York City Employees Retirement System (NYCERS). This bill aims to enhance the retirement benefits for EMTs by allowing them to retire after 22.5 years of service with a pension calculated based on their final average salary (FAS). The bill outlines specific criteria for eligibility, including definitions of an EMT member and the conditions under which they may participate, thus addressing workforce retention and support for essential public service workers.

Contention

Debate surrounding Bill A08444 may focus on the economic ramifications of increasing retirement benefits for EMTs. Supporters argue that this bill acknowledges the unique challenges and risks associated with the occupation and thereby justifies enhanced retirement programs as essential for workforce sustainability. Conversely, opponents may raise concerns about the potential financial burden this could impose on city budgets, especially in an economic environment where funding for public services remains tight. The ongoing discussions highlight the importance of balancing public service needs with fiscal responsibility.