Superannuation Guarantee (Frontline Emergency Service Workers) Bill 2025: what a 4.4 per cent super boost for firefighters and paramedics would mean

The short answer

Superannuation Guarantee (Frontline Emergency Service Workers) Bill 2025: what a 4.4 per cent super boost for firefighters and paramedics would mean

The Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Amendment (Frontline Emergency Service Workers) Bill 2025 is a private senator's bill that would increase the compulsory superannuation guarantee rate for firefighters and paramedics by 4.4 percentage points above the standard rate, matching the base superannuation contribution rate provided to Australian Defence Force personnel. Introduced by Senator Nick McKim (Greens, Tasmania) on 5 February 2025, the bill is currently before the Senate. It lapsed at the end of Parliament on 21 July 2025 but was restored to the Notice Paper on 23 July 2025, reflecting standard practice when a parliament is prorogued and bills are revived.

This is a federal system guide. State constitutions, parliaments and local-government laws can allocate comparable functions differently.

The useful question is not only “what is the rule?” but also “who administers it, which document controls it, and when might it change?” That distinction prevents an accurate general explanation from becoming wrong advice in a particular election, chamber or policy setting.

Evidence review

What the bill proposes

The bill amends the Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act 1992 to introduce a higher superannuation guarantee rate for two specified categories of workers: firefighters and paramedics. The proposed increase is 4.4 percentage points above whatever the standard superannuation guarantee rate is at the time.

As at 2026, the standard SG rate is 11.5 per cent, meaning the bill would require employers of firefighters and paramedics to contribute 15.9 per cent of ordinary time earnings to superannuation. As the legislated SG rate rises to 12 per cent, the bill's rate would rise to 16.4 per cent.

This elevated rate is designed to match the base rate of superannuation contributions provided to Australian Defence Force personnel under the military superannuation arrangements. The ADF base contribution rate has historically been higher than the civilian SG rate, reflecting the physical demands and risks associated with military service.

The bill does not change the SG rate for other workers and does not affect the legislated trajectory that saw the standard SG rate rise to 11.5 per cent and is legislated to rise to 12 per cent. It operates as a targeted supplement for two specific occupational groups.

Evidence review

The parity argument: emergency workers and the ADF

The bill's central policy argument is one of parity between frontline emergency service workers and military personnel. ADF members receive superannuation contributions at a higher base rate than civilian workers, reflecting the physical demands, risks, and public service nature of military employment.

Senator McKim's bill argues that firefighters and paramedics face comparable workplace risks — including exposure to trauma, hazardous environments, physically demanding work, and irregular hours — and should receive comparable superannuation treatment. The argument draws on the concept of 'frontline service' as a unifying category that transcends the military-civilian distinction.

The 4.4 per cent increase mirrors the differential between the ADF base contribution rate and the civilian SG rate. The bill's supporters argue that emergency service workers often face career-shortening injuries, psychological trauma, and burnout, making adequate retirement savings particularly important.

The parity argument has resonance in the context of recent Australian bushfire seasons and the COVID-19 pandemic, during which emergency service workers were publicly celebrated as essential frontline responders. The bill seeks to translate that public recognition into a concrete retirement benefit.

Evidence review

Who is covered and who is not

The bill expressly covers two occupational groups: firefighters and paramedics. It does not extend to police officers, state emergency service volunteers, or other emergency service personnel — a limitation that has attracted both support (for keeping the bill targeted) and criticism (for excluding other frontline workers).

The coverage applies to both paid (career) firefighters and paramedics, regardless of whether they are employed by state or territory governments, private ambulance services, or other entities. The superannuation guarantee applies to employers of all types, so the obligation would fall on whoever employs the firefighter or paramedic.

Volunteer firefighters — who make up the majority of firefighting personnel in many parts of Australia — would not benefit directly from the bill, as the SG system only applies to employees. This is a significant limitation, given that volunteer firefighters play a critical role in responding to bushfires across regional and rural Australia.

The bill's definitional scope would be specified in the amending provisions. The Explanatory Memorandum would provide detail on exactly how 'firefighter' and 'paramedic' are defined for the purposes of the legislation, which is important given the variety of employment arrangements and job titles across jurisdictions.

Evidence review

Cost implications

The bill would increase employment costs for organisations that employ firefighters and paramedics. The additional 4.4 per cent superannuation guarantee represents a direct increase in on-costs — the employer costs beyond salary that include superannuation, payroll tax, workers' compensation insurance, and other expenses.

State and territory government fire and ambulance services are the largest employers of firefighters and paramedics and would bear the bulk of the cost. Private ambulance operators and industrial fire services would also face increased costs. The financial impact statement in the Explanatory Memorandum would be expected to quantify these costs.

The bill does not include Commonwealth funding to offset state costs, meaning the measure would be an unfunded mandate on state and territory governments. This is a significant political obstacle, as state governments of all political persuasions may resist an unfunded increase in their employment costs.

State and territory governments already face budget pressures in health and emergency services, and an additional superannuation cost would need to be accommodated within existing or increased budget allocations. The fiscal impact would vary across jurisdictions depending on the number of employed firefighters and paramedics.

Evidence review

Where the bill stands

The bill was introduced in the Senate on 5 February 2025 by Senator Nick McKim. The first reading occurred on the same day, and the second reading was also moved. The bill lapsed at the end of Parliament on 21 July 2025, which is a standard occurrence when a parliament is prorogued — all bills on the Notice Paper that have not passed lapse.

The bill was restored to the Notice Paper on 23 July 2025, meaning it was revived in the new parliamentary session. This restoration is automatic for most bills and reflects the Senate's standing orders. As at 17 July 2026, the bill remains 'Before Senate' awaiting second reading debate.

No proposed amendments have been circulated, and the bill has not been referred to a committee. As a private senator's bill from the Greens, it would require support from either the government or the opposition to pass the Senate.

The bill has been before the Senate for over 17 months without debate, which reflects the low priority typically given to private senators' bills that lack government or opposition support. The lapsed and restored history also indicates that the bill has not attracted sufficient parliamentary attention to progress.

Evidence review

Distinction from existing superannuation arrangements for emergency workers

Many career firefighters and paramedics already receive superannuation above the SG rate through enterprise agreements or state-based public sector schemes. Some state fire services offer defined benefit schemes or higher contribution rates negotiated through collective bargaining.

The bill differs from these arrangements in that it would create a statutory minimum — employers could still provide more than 15.9 per cent, but could not provide less. This is consistent with the superannuation guarantee's function as a legislative floor, not a ceiling.

However, the interaction between the proposed statutory rate and existing enterprise agreement provisions would need careful consideration. If an enterprise agreement currently provides, for example, a 13 per cent contribution rate, the bill would override that to the extent of the 2.9 percentage point gap.

There is also a question about how the bill would interact with defined benefit schemes, which operate differently from accumulation schemes. Defined benefit schemes provide a predetermined benefit based on final salary and years of service rather than the accumulated contributions. The bill's application to employers offering defined benefit schemes may require specific transitional provisions.

Common questions

Before you rely on the answer