1. Where are you located? 2. Anyone else think the difference between an EMT-B and an EMT-P should be more than 6k?
A good rule of thumb is that a medic should make about 50% more than a basic given the additional training and responsibility.
Privates in NYC generally pay around 10-11/hr for BLS and around 19-21/hr for medics. At my old hospital EMT's top out at around 40k/yr, medics in the low 60's. FDNY pays their medics around 33% more than their BLS according to their site:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/fdny/html/community/ems_salary_benefits_042607.shtml
In Charleston SC, the same state (but not the agency) where I believe Reaper works, the medics start at around 38k, with a bump to 46k/yr after the crew chief promotion. The EMT's make in the mid to upper 20's/yr if I remember correctly, so those figures are probably accurate.
Where I'm presently employed a basic FF/EMT earns a little over 48k in their first year. Firemedics earn over 65k out of the academy.
EMS salaries are anemic in most areas. Notice how the fire based, union salaries in my area are much higher. One year on in Charleston would net me 46k/yr to start. One year on here nets me over 69k/yr w/o OT. That's a 50% jump. The cost of living in my county, which is two counties and 25 mins or so from my place of employment, is maybe 15% more than in SC. Way more opportunity for upward mobility along with raises in addition to step increases. My pension is also 75% to start with an increasing multiplier over the requisite 25 years/55 years of age plus a three year DROP (look it up, it'll blow your mind). Charleston offers the meager SC state retirement rate of 50%/yr after 28 years of service. No thanks.
Why do I mention this? When considering salary vs cost of living in choosing your place of work, the area with the higher cost of living is more desireable than the cheaper one, provided you can save and invest the same percentage of your base salary. If there's a defined benefit plan, it should also be at least equal to your former employer percentage wise. If I'm making 50k/yr, and I'm setting aside 15%, that's 7500/yr. If I'm making 75k/yr, and investing 15% annually, that's 11250/yr. A pension at 50% of 50k is 25k annually. 50% of 75k is 37.5k.
Back to the 7500/yr savings vs 11250. If you invest 7500/yr at 8% (wholly attainable with only moderate risk) you'll have over 917,000 in 30 years. If you do the same with the 11250, you'll have 1,376,000. I don't know about you, but if given the choice, I'd rather have an extra 459k in deferred comp along with an extra 12.5k/yr in pension benefits.
My point is this - those who justify their comparatively lower salary by their lower cost of living will end up with much less in retirement. The individual living in an expensive area can always sell and move to a cheaper area, preferably one with no state tax, taking their higher pension and or defined contribution nut with them.
A wise man once said that it's all about the best retirement. This is one very important angle to consider.
Also, don't fall into the trap of leaving one place for another just for a dollar or two per hour increase. Look at the benefits (especially medical, the coverage, deductibles, etc) and retirement, as well as scheduling, leave policy and such.