Will AI replace Chefs?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 56 official task statements scored for Chefs (United Kingdom, SOC 5434), 18% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 24 out of 100 (range 20–30, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.

Which tasks in “Chefs” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Analyse recipes to assign prices to menu items based on costs” (93/100, very high); “Record personnel, production, and operational data on specified forms” (93/100, very high); “Order supplies from sales representatives to maintain stock levels in hospitality settings” (79/100, high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.

Which tasks in “Chefs” stay human?

About 72% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Understand basic culinary cuts such as chopping, dicing, julienne, and chiffonade” (0/100, minimal); “Produce pastries and confectionery to specification, using large scale production methods” (0/100, minimal); “Learn proper techniques for handling culinary ingredients” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.

What should someone working in “Chefs” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 18% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 72% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.

How is the AI exposure score for Chefs calculated?

Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 56 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

UK dataswitch to US

Chefs

maintaining food safety and hygiene standards, reviewing and updating menus and dishes according to business needs and external factors and creating new recipes to expand culinary offerings. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI is already taking a real slice of the routine work here: analysing recipes to assign prices to menu items based on costs. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 18%
changing shape: 10%
staying human: 72%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

Whole-job exposure score 24 out of 100 (20–30 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 56 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.

How we know this

What is measured: Every published task statement for chefs is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-04. Read the full method.

That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, checking the quality of finished dishes, stays yours. New tools, same person answering for it.

Your week, as this page understands it

Chefs plan menus and prepare, or oversee the preparation of food in hotels, restaurants, clubs, private households and other establishments. The job title says “chefs”. The real job is the part underneath: checking the quality of finished dishes. That is the thing someone has to be right about.

The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But chefs is not one task. It is 56 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is checking the quality of finished dishes, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 18%
changing shape: 10%
staying human: 72%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

How we know this

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-04. Read the full method.

Your job, task by task

These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.

8 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Shifting to AI

10 tasks

Tasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.

Planning menus and food utilisation based on guest numbers
This is reading one thing and writing another: menus in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 90 · 5434/00
Source: “Plan menus and food utilisation based on guest numbers, nutrition, taste, popularity, and cost.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Menu planning balances covers, cost, nutrition and popularity, which is exactly the sort of planning software does.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Analysing recipes to assign prices to menu items based on costs
This is reading one thing and writing another: recipes in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Analyse recipes to assign prices to menu items based on costs.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 93 out of 100 (89–97 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Costing a recipe and setting a price from ingredient costs is arithmetic software already does.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Determining production schedules and staff requirements necessary to ensure timely delivery of services
This is reading one thing and writing another: production schedules in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Determine production schedules and staff requirements necessary to ensure timely delivery of services.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Production schedules and staffing levels follow from expected covers and recorded prep times.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Estimating amounts and costs of required supplies
This is reading one thing and writing another: amounts in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Estimate amounts and costs of required supplies, such as food and ingredients.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Estimating how much food is needed and what it costs is calculation from recipes and sales figures.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Changing shape

6 tasks

Tasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.

Managing stock to meet procurement and operational needs
The software now makes the first pass at stock, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Manage stock to meet procurement and operational needs.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Stock levels and ordering are largely system-driven, though someone still counts what is in the fridge.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reviewing and updating menus and dishes according to business needs and external factors
The software now makes the first pass at menus, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Review and update menus and dishes according to business needs and external factors.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Reviewing menus against sales, seasons and costs is data work, though changes are proved in the kitchen.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Identifying opportunities to research, source and develop new culinary offers, recipes, products and product lines
The software now makes the first pass at opportunities, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Identify opportunities to research, source and develop new culinary offers including recipes, products and product lines.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Researching trends, products and suppliers for new offers is largely desk research software does well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Staying human

40 tasks

Tasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.

Maintaining food safety and hygiene standards
This work happens in the physical world: food safety, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 95 · 5434/00
Source: “Maintain food safety and hygiene standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Hygiene standards are kept by how people actually handle food and clean surfaces, not by paperwork alone.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Checking the quality of finished dishes
This work happens in the physical world: the quality of finished dishes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 95 · 5434/00
Source: “Check the quality of finished dishes.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Judging a finished dish means looking at it, smelling it and tasting it in the kitchen.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Cooking food items according to relevant legislation and occupational standards
This work happens in the physical world: food items, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 95 · 5434/00
Source: “Cook food items according to relevant legislation and occupational standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cooking food to standard is done with hands, heat and ingredients in a real kitchen.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Show the other 46 tasks

Recording personnel, production and operational data on specified forms
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: personnel, production and operational data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 5434/00
Source: “Record personnel, production, and operational data on specified forms.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 93 out of 100 (89–97 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Recording production and staffing figures on standard forms is routine data entry.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Ordering supplies from sales representatives to maintain stock levels in hospitality settings
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: supplies in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Order supplies from sales representatives to maintain stock levels in hospitality settings.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 79 out of 100 (75–83 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Placing orders against stock levels is routine ordering that systems already largely handle.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning menus incorporating newly developed dishes
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: menus incorporating newly developed dishes in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Plan menus incorporating newly developed dishes.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Slotting new dishes into a balanced menu is planning work software can draft.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Requisitioning specific food supplies to ensure efficient operation of a restaurant kitchen
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: specific food supplies in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Requisition specific food supplies to ensure efficient operation of a restaurant kitchen.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Requisitioning supplies from menus and stock figures is largely a system task with some chef judgement.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Identifying new suppliers for procurement needs
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: new suppliers in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 75 · 5434/00
Source: “Identify new suppliers for procurement needs.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Finding candidate suppliers is search work software does well, though sampling still decides.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning menus in consultation with chefs to meet customer preferences
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: menus in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Plan menus in consultation with chefs to meet customer preferences.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (57–71 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Menu drafting from customer preferences suits software, with chefs shaping the final choices.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Suggesting improvements to enhance process efficiency and workplace effectiveness
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at improvements, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 5434/00
Source: “Suggest improvements to enhance process efficiency and workplace effectiveness.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Spotting process improvements from operational data is analysis software handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Coordinating planning for food operations within establishments
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at food operations within establishments, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Coordinate planning for food operations within establishments such as clubs, hotels, or restaurant chains.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Planning food operations across sites is largely a desk exercise built on sales and cost data.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Managing the sourcing and collection of raw products to ensure supply chain efficiency
changing shape
The software now makes the first pass at the sourcing and collection of raw products, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 5434/00
Source: “Manage the sourcing and collection of raw products to ensure supply chain efficiency.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Sourcing and collection scheduling is largely logistics data work, though goods still have to be moved.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning and launching the culinary offer by liaising with stakeholders
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles the culinary offer and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Plan and launch the culinary offer by liaising with stakeholders.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: The plan can be drafted digitally, but launching an offer runs on people agreeing and cooking it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Creating new recipes to expand culinary offerings
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: new recipes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Create new recipes to expand culinary offerings.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 29 out of 100 (22–36 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Ideas for new dishes can be generated freely, but a recipe is only real once it is cooked and tasted.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing new products and improving existing ones based on market trends
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: new products, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 5434/00
Source: “Develop new products and improve existing ones based on market trends, seasonality, and customer feedback.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 29 out of 100 (22–36 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Trends and feedback can be analysed automatically, but improving a product means making and tasting versions.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Coordinating kitchen operations by liaising with stakeholders
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles kitchen operations and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Coordinate kitchen operations by liaising with stakeholders.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Keeping the kitchen aligned with suppliers and front of house runs largely on people talking.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Communicating with the head chef
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles the head chef and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 5434/00
Source: “Communicate with the head chef, team, organisation or client with regard to the pastry offer and specific briefs.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Agreeing a pastry brief with the head chef or client works through conversation.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Recruiting bar and kitchen staff
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles bar and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 5434/00
Source: “Recruit bar and kitchen staff.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Adverts and shortlists can be automated, but hiring a kitchen still means meeting people and trialling them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Coordinating the repair of damaged equipment to ensure operational efficiency
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the repair of damaged equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 5434/00
Source: “Coordinate the repair of damaged equipment to ensure operational efficiency.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Arranging a repair can be organised digitally, but the machine still needs people beside it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Discussing menus for weddings with customers
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles menus and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 5434/00
Source: “Discuss menus for weddings with customers.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Wedding menu discussions depend on trust built with the couple in a real conversation.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Inspecting deliveries for accuracy and quality upon arrival
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: deliveries, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Inspect deliveries for accuracy and quality upon arrival.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 14 out of 100 (7–21 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Counts can be checked against paperwork automatically, but seeing the goods means being at the bay.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Ensuring the safe use of expensive and complex equipment and any related substances
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the safe use of expensive, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Ensure the safe use of expensive and complex equipment and any related substances.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (2–16 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Safe use of heavy kitchen equipment is about how people handle it in practice.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning and preparing food
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: food, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Plan and prepare food for parties, holiday meals, luncheons, special functions, and other social events.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (0–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Planning a function menu can be drafted digitally, but the food itself is cooked by hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Coordinating staff engaged in food preparation
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: staff, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 5434/00
Source: “Coordinate staff engaged in food preparation.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Directing cooks through service happens on the kitchen floor, in the moment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conducting training for workers on food preparation techniques
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: workers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Conduct training for workers on food preparation techniques.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Teaching a cook a technique means showing them at the bench and correcting their hands.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Supervising food preparation and cooking activities in multiple kitchens or restaurants
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: food preparation, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Supervise food preparation and cooking activities in multiple kitchens or restaurants.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Supervising cooking across kitchens still depends on a chef walking them and seeing service.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Communicating effectively with team members
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: team members, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Communicate effectively with team members, updating on progress and coordinating work activities.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Kitchen communication happens live, at speed, alongside the work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Working safely at all times by adhering to relevant legislation and regulations to ensure the safety of self
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: all times, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Work safely at all times by adhering to relevant legislation and regulations to ensure the safety of self and others.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (1–9 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Working safely is about what a person does with knives, heat and equipment during service.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Leading the team overseeing the preparation and presentation of quality food items
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the team overseeing the preparation, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 5434/00
Source: “Lead the team overseeing the preparation and presentation of quality food items.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Leading the section through service depends on a chef the team follows, present at the pass.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Preparing and cooking food to a high standard
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: food, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 95 · 5434/00
Source: “Prepare and cook food to a high standard.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Preparing and cooking food to a high standard is skilled hands-on work at the stove.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Assisting the chef de partie by working in different sections of the kitchen
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the chef de partie, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 5434/00
Source: “Assist the chef de partie by working in different sections of the kitchen.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Covering different kitchen sections means physically doing the work in each of them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Following recipe specifications for portion control and waste management
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: recipe specifications, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 5434/00
Source: “Follow recipe specifications for portion control and waste management.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Portioning to spec and cutting waste happens with the food in front of you.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Overseeing the presentation and serving of food
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the presentation, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 5434/00
Source: “Oversee the presentation and serving of food.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Checking how plates look and go out has to happen at the pass as service runs.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Overseeing the quality of finished products against recipe specifications
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the quality of finished products against recipe specifications, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 5434/00
Source: “Oversee the quality of finished products against recipe specifications.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Comparing a finished dish with the recipe means seeing and tasting it yourself.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing dishes and menu items using advanced and basic methods according to brand standards and recipes
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: dishes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 5434/00
Source: “Prepare dishes and menu items using advanced and basic methods according to brand standards and recipes.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Making dishes to brand recipes is hands-on cooking.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Inspecting supplies, equipment or work areas to ensure conformance to established standards
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: supplies, equipment or work areas, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Inspect supplies, equipment, or work areas to ensure conformance to established standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Checking supplies, equipment and work areas means walking the kitchen and looking at them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Maintaining kitchen work areas, equipment and utensils in clean condition
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: kitchen work areas, equipment and utensils, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Maintain kitchen work areas, equipment, and utensils in clean condition.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Keeping kitchen surfaces and utensils clean is hands-on work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Preparing food and carry out basic cooking tasks
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: food, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Prepare food and carry out basic cooking tasks.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Preparing and cooking food is physical kitchen work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Preparing foods of all types on a regular basis
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: foods of all types, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 5434/00
Source: “Prepare foods of all types on a regular basis.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cooking food day in, day out is physical craft work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Demonstrating new cooking techniques to staff
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: new cooking techniques, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Demonstrate new cooking techniques to staff.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Demonstrating a technique means doing it in front of staff so they can copy it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Learning, and applying knowledging of appropriate portion sizes in meal preparation
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: appropriate portion sizes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Learn and apply knowledge of appropriate portion sizes in meal preparation.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Portioning correctly is learned and applied with food and hands, not on a screen.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Maintaining the work area according to safety and environmental standards
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the work area, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Maintain the work area according to safety and environmental standards.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Keeping the work area clean and safe is physical work in the kitchen.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Producing products that can be effectively
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: products, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Produce products that can be effectively presented, held, served and or transported to customers on and off-site.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Making food that holds, travels and presents well is hands-on production.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Testing the safety and quality of food
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the safety, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 5434/00
Source: “Test the safety and quality of food.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Testing food safety and quality means handling and tasting the actual food.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Creating decorative food displays
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: decorative food displays, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 5434/00
Source: “Create decorative food displays.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Building a decorative display is craft done with the food itself.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Learning fundamental cooking techniques, including knife skills
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: fundamental cooking techniques, including knife skills, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 5434/00
Source: “Learn fundamental cooking techniques, including knife skills.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Knife skills are learned through repetition with a knife in hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Learning proper techniques for handling culinary ingredients
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: proper techniques, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 5434/00
Source: “Learn proper techniques for handling culinary ingredients.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Handling ingredients properly is a physical skill practised with the ingredients.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Producing pastries and confectionery
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: pastries, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 5434/00
Source: “Produce pastries and confectionery to specification, using large scale production methods.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Producing pastries at scale is hands-on production work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Understanding basic culinary cuts, chopping, dicing, julienne and chiffonade
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: basic culinary cuts, chopping, dicing, julienne and chiffonade, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 5434/00
Source: “Understand basic culinary cuts such as chopping, dicing, julienne, and chiffonade.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Culinary cuts are a hand skill practised on a board.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: £30,000a year, before tax, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.ashe-t14, 2025 · ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025)Provisional, because the ONS revises this figure in the autumn.
How we know this
Source: ashe-t14
Reference period: ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025)
Rounding: Shown to the nearest £100. The exact published figure is in the downloadable dataset. We do not render pounds the survey cannot support.
People doing this job: 222,700in the UK, 2026.nomis-aps · Apr 2025-Mar 2026 (latest APS 12-month period)This headcount comes from a survey, not a census, so treat it as a good estimate rather than an exact count.

What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.

Why this is shifting

The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: recipes in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: analysing recipes to assign prices to menu items based on costs and planning menus and food utilisation based on guest numbers. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where the quality of finished dishes gets done. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.

Your move

Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend

Start with what does not change: checking the quality of finished dishes is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 18% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 10% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 72% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 56 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

So the thing worth your attention is not the job going away. It is the layer around it. Analysing recipes to assign prices to menu items based on costs is the part turning into software, and being the person who understands that layer is worth money.

This week: one thing

Ask the one question. Find whoever is bringing new software into your workplace (the manager, the office, whoever runs the system) and ask them what it is meant to do to recipes, and what it is not meant to touch. Ten minutes, this week, before anyone decides it for you.

What you end up holding: a straight answer about what is actually being rolled out, and when
How long it takes: ten minutes

If there’s nobody obvious to ask, or you’d rather not ask your manager: Put the same question to your union rep, your shift lead or the person who has been there longest, in person, over a break. Same ten minutes, same answer, and you will usually get a straighter one. Write down what they say. The note is the artifact, and it tells you whether the quality of finished dishes is in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no licence needed.

Over the next 90 days

Get inside the tool rollout rather than waiting for it. Over the next ninety days, ask to be in the group that tests, checks or signs off whatever new system arrives near managing stock to meet procurement and operational needs. It is usually an unglamorous seat that nobody fights for, and it is the one that decides how the software is used on your job rather than to it.

Over the next 12 months

On this evidence I would not retrain out of this job, and I will say that plainly rather than hedge it. The task list here is dominated by work that stays with a person. What I would do with a year is get formally recognised for the layer around it (the systems, the compliance, the planning), so you are the one who understands the software instead of the one it is done to. Before you pay for anything, spend an hour with National Careers Service. It is free and government-funded, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.

The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them

I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.

I checked the 12 nearest UK occupations to chefs (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was cooks: only about 16% of its durable work is work you already do, it pays 19.3% less and there are far fewer of those jobs than of yours. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 24/100 here, with only 18% of the task list in the top band, and “check the quality of finished dishes” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.

How that was checked: this job was compared against all 412 UK occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.

3 moves I checked and rejected

These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.

Cooks
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “prepare and cook food to a high standard”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 16% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 16% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on. It is a pay cut, in those words: £24,228 against your £30,010, 19.3% less (ASHE Table 14.7a, 2025 provisional (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice. And it is a narrow door: about 47,500 of those jobs against 222,700 of yours (ONS via Nomis), 21% as many seats.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Restaurant and catering establishment managers and proprietors
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “oversee the presentation and serving of food”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 14% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 14% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Publicans and managers of licensed premises
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “conduct training for workers on food preparation techniques”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 13% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 13% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on. And it is a narrow door: about 31,100 of those jobs against 222,700 of yours (ONS via Nomis), 14% as many seats.
Look at that job’s page anyway →

What I’d stop worrying about

A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.

The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 18% of its task weight, across 56 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The headlines about your trade disappearing
They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like checking the quality of finished dishes arrive through rules, insurance and money, slowly and visibly. This page tracks the task evidence and will move when it moves.
Retraining out of a job that is holding up
On this evidence I would not spend money leaving. Spend it on the layer around the job instead: the tools, the paperwork, the planning. That is where the change actually is.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.

You are reading the United Kingdom figures

The United States splits this work across more than one official group, of which Chefs and Head Cooks is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.

Switch to the United States page →partial match

The other groups this work is counted across:

First-Line Supervisors of Food Preparation and Serving Workers

In US official statistics this job is counted as Chefs and Head Cooks and First-Line Supervisors of Food Preparation and Serving Workers. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.

Your route through this

Where to go next, and what it costs

Free, and complete

The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.

In England:
National Careers Service
A free hour with a government-funded careers adviser is worth more than another evening of reading. In England that's the National Careers Service.
Free, government-funded
- Discover your skills and careers (the skills assessment)
In England:
National Careers Service - Find a course
Search what's actually running near you before you spend anything.
Free to search; individual courses vary
In England:
Free courses for jobs (Level 3 qualifications)
A free Level 3 qualification you already qualify for beats a paid course you don't need.
Free for eligible adults
In England:
Skills Bootcamps
Free, up to 16 weeks, and you get a job interview at the end. In England these are Skills Bootcamps - search what's running near you.
Free for eligible adults in England
- Skills Bootcamps - what they are and who can do them (DfE, Skills for Careers)
- Skills Bootcamps - JobHelp (DWP)
In Scotland:
My World of Work (Skills Development Scotland)
In Scotland it's My World of Work, from Skills Development Scotland.
Free, publicly funded
- Skills Development Scotland
In Wales:
Careers Wales
In Wales it's Careers Wales.
Free, Welsh Government-funded
In Northern Ireland:
Careers Service Northern Ireland
In Northern Ireland it's the Careers Service on nidirect.
Free, Department for the Economy-funded

No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for chefs, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 18% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.

Try The AI Authority free →

7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.

The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for chefs. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for chefs launches. Nothing else.

That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.

We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.

No Space for chefs yet. Should there be one?

Collab365 Spaces is built by the same people as this site. We find the problems that AI and automation are creating inside one kind of work, then solve them as short courses, briefings and Blueprints. Each Space is the community too, so the research and the people doing your job are in the same place.

What a Space actually is, in full

Collab365 launches new communities where the need is real. If one for chefs existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

Your email

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for chefs launches. We never sell it, never use it for unrelated marketing, and every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Our privacy policy has the full version.

This unlocks nothing. Every figure, every row and every step on this page is already yours, whether you fill this in or not.

No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.

Questions people ask about this job

Will AI replace Chefs?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 56 official task statements scored for Chefs (United Kingdom, SOC 5434), 18% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 24 out of 100 (range 20–30, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
Which tasks in “Chefs” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Analyse recipes to assign prices to menu items based on costs” (93/100, very high); “Record personnel, production, and operational data on specified forms” (93/100, very high); “Order supplies from sales representatives to maintain stock levels in hospitality settings” (79/100, high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
Which tasks in “Chefs” stay human?: About 72% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Understand basic culinary cuts such as chopping, dicing, julienne, and chiffonade” (0/100, minimal); “Produce pastries and confectionery to specification, using large scale production methods” (0/100, minimal); “Learn proper techniques for handling culinary ingredients” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
What should someone working in “Chefs” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 18% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 72% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
How is the AI exposure score for Chefs calculated?: Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 56 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

Where these numbers come from

About the data on this page

Provisional, because the ONS revises this figure in the autumn.
This headcount comes from a survey, not a census, so treat it as a good estimate rather than an exact count.
The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
8 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Task statements: gaisi-indexProcessing: catalogue-bridge → ssc-relatedness-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights: gaisi-index (relatedness)
Scores: Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
Pay and employment: ashe-t14 (ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025))nomis-aps (Apr 2025-Mar 2026 (latest APS 12-month period))

Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.

The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.

The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.

How we score a job Download this release Look up another job

Using these figures?

Cite this

Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.

Plain text

Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).

BibTeX

@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
  title        = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
  author       = {{Collab365}},
  year         = {2026},
  url          = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
  note         = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}

Permalink

https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1

Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.