Futureproof
Menu

UK dataswitch to US

Customer service occupations n.e.c.

assisting in student recruitment, enrolment and placement activities, responding to customer enquiries and advising students with adjustment or academic problems. 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: answering customer questions by email. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.

Your move: what a customer service occupations n.e.c. can actually do about this ↓

That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, answering in-person enquiries and providing necessary information or assistance, stays yours. The tools change, the responsibility doesn't.

Your week, as this page understands it

Job holders in this unit group perform a variety of customer service occupations not elsewhere classified in minor group 721: Customer service occupations. The job title says “customer service occupations n.e.c.”. The real job is the part underneath: answering in-person enquiries and providing necessary information or assistance. 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 customer service occupations n.e.c. is not one task. It is 12 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is answering in-person enquiries and providing necessary information or assistance, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI
24%
changing shape
14%
staying human
62%

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

Whole-job exposure score 45 out of 100 (40–51 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, across 12 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 customer service occupations n.e.c. 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.

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.

Shifting to AI

3 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.

  • Responding to customer enquiries

    This is reading one thing and writing another: customer enquiries in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 70 · 7219/01
    Source: “Respond to customer enquiries.” (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: Answering customer questions from known information is something software already does at speed and scale.

    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.

  • Answering customer questions received via phone

    This is reading one thing and writing another: customer questions received via phone in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 65 · 7219/01
    Source: “Answer customer questions received via phone, email, and social media platforms.” (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: Replies across phone, email and social media follow familiar patterns software can produce.

    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.

  • Answering customer questions by email

    This is reading one thing and writing another: customer questions in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.

    importance 60 · 7219/01
    Source: “Answer customer questions by email.” (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: Email replies drawn from company information are among the tasks software does most reliably.

    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.

Changing shape

2 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.

  • Providing career information to individuals for educational or vocational planning

    The software now makes the first pass at career information, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 60 · 7219/01
    Source: “Provide career information to individuals for educational or vocational planning.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 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; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Careers information is well documented, though people often want to talk it through.

    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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Planning orientation programmes and group conferences to promote the adjustment of individuals to new life experiences

    The software now makes the first pass at orientation programmes, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.

    importance 50 · 7219/01
    Source: “Plan orientation programmes and group conferences to promote the adjustment of individuals to new life experiences, such as starting university.” (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 an orientation programme is organising and writing work that software supports 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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Staying human

7 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.

  • Assisting in student recruitment, enrolment and placement activities

    The value here is that a specific person handles student recruitment, enrolment and placement activities and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 90 · 7219/01
    Source: “Assist in student recruitment, enrolment, and placement activities.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 39 out of 100 (32–46 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Enrolment admin follows set steps software handles, though applicants often want to speak to someone.

    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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Answering in-person enquiries and providing necessary information or assistance

    This work happens in the physical world: in-person enquiries, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 85 · 7219/01
    Source: “Answer in-person enquiries and provide necessary information or assistance.” (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; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: The information is easy to look up, but the task is answering people who come to the desk.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Advising students on academic and career choices

    The value here is that a specific person handles students and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 80 · 7219/01
    Source: “Advise students on academic and career choices.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 32 out of 100 (28–36 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high 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: Good advice on choices rests on knowing the pupil and being someone they trust.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Advising students on addressing educational problems

    The value here is that a specific person handles students and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 75 · 7219/01
    Source: “Advise students on addressing educational problems.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 24 out of 100 (17–31 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: Advice on study problems works because a student opens up to someone they trust.

    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 3/4.

  • Advising students with adjustment or academic problems

    The value here is that a specific person handles students and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 70 · 7219/01
    Source: “Advise students with adjustment or academic problems.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (24–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Helping a struggling pupil turns on a trusted relationship built up face to face over time.

    The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

Show the other 2 tasks

  • Educating individuals and groups on available financial assistance for college or university students

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles individuals and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 50 · 7219/01
    Source: “Educate individuals and groups on available financial assistance for college or university students.” (UK task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 39 out of 100 (32–46 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.

    The rating behind it: Funding rules are published and easy to explain, but sessions are usually delivered in person.

    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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

  • Establishing contacts with employers to create internship and employment opportunities for students

    staying human

    The value here is that a specific person handles contacts and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.

    importance 55 · 7219/01
    Source: “Establish contacts with employers to create internship and employment opportunities for students.” (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: Employer links are built on personal contacts and follow-up over time.

    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.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay
£27,800a 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
283,300in 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: customer questions in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: answering customer questions by email and responding to customer enquiries. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where in-person enquiries get 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

Your week is splitting in two, and which half fills it is the whole question. Answering customer questions by email is going; answering in-person enquiries and providing necessary information or assistance is not.

So, given all that: 24% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 14% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 62% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 12 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

The occupation is an average and you are not, so the first job below is finding out where your own week actually sits.

This week: one thing

Print the task ledger above and put your own hours next to each row. Roughly, in pen, in one sitting. Then look at which group your hours actually pile up in. Twenty minutes, this week.

What you end up holding
your own week, on one page, sorted into what is shifting and what is not
How long it takes
about twenty minutes

If printing it isn’t practical: Read the rows off this page and write the same list on the back of an envelope. Same twenty minutes, same page, and it works just as well said out loud to someone who knows the job. The point is your hours next to the rows, not the paper it is on.

Over the next 90 days

Volunteer toward the durable end, visibly. Over the next ninety days put your hand up for the work in the bottom group (answering in-person enquiries and providing necessary information or assistance) and let people see you doing it. Not a new project: the same job, with your mix deliberately tilted. The point is that when the rota or the reorganisation comes, the version of you people picture is the one doing the part that stays.

Over the next 12 months

Claim a specialism at the durable end and let the other end go. Over a year, deliberately become the person who handles answering in-person enquiries and providing necessary information or assistance, and deliberately stop being the first choice for the rows in the top group. That trade costs something, because the exposed work is often the comfortable work. Decide it on purpose rather than by drift. 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

Now the roads out, with the honest bill on each one. One route survived the checks. The rest are below with the reason they did not.

  • Customer service occupations n.e.c.Legal associate professionals

    a year or morematched on shared tasks

    Working out who is actually right from the paperwork, and writing it up so it holds, is the same skill whether the file is a complaint or a case.

    The complaint you had to untangle across three systems is a small version of what a legal associate does with a case file.

    The work the two jobs share

    • You already do

      “Obtain and examine all relevant information to assess validity of complaints and to determine possible causes...”

      They do

      “Investigate facts and law of cases and search pertinent sources... to determine causes of action and to prepare cases.”

    • You already do

      “Keep records of customer interactions or transactions, recording details of inquiries, complaints, or comments, as well as actions taken.”

      They do

      “Request, review, and summarize relevant records for the cases.”

    What you would not already have: Court and tribunal procedure is entirely new work. UK 3520 is also broader than the US paralegal group - it includes barristers' clerks and other legal associate roles.

    The honest bill

    Pay: £34,700 against your £27,800 (ONS ASHE Table 14.7a, 2025 provisional (both)).

    • Credential: Default-closed. 'Paralegal' is not a protected title in England and Wales, but legal associate roles are normally reached through a recognised qualification route, and Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own arrangements. The register lookup was not run for this release, so the cautious form renders and the route is banded year-plus.
    • How many seats there are: FIRES. 57,300 legal associate jobs against 283,300 customer service jobs is 20.2%, under the 25% floor. Both counts must appear on the card.
    • Is the target job itself holding up: Cannot be evaluated - no UK occupational projection exists. Stated as a gap.
    • What you live on meanwhile: Qualification study alongside work; nation-scoped free careers advice first.
    • Direction caveat: Document review and summarising is itself being automated. The honest aim is the dispute and judgement end.

    How long: A year or more of part-time qualification study alongside work.

    See what AI is doing to legal associate professionals

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.

  • Education advisers and school inspectors

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “advise students on addressing educational problems”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 11% 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 11% 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 39,000 of those jobs against 283,300 of yours (ONS via Nomis), 14% as many seats.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Careers advisers and vocational guidance specialists

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “plan orientation programmes and group conferences to promote the adjustment of individuals to new life experiences”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 10% 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 10% 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 33,700 of those jobs against 283,300 of yours (ONS via Nomis), 12% as many seats.

    Look at that job’s page anyway →

  • Higher education teaching professionals

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already advise students with adjustment or academic problems, and their equivalent is to supervise students' research projects to guide academic development. Across both published task lists that is about 4% of the durable work in that job.

    Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 4% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.

    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: 24% of its task weight, across 12 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.

  • The whole-job doom story

    Nothing on this page says this job ends. It says the mix inside it moves. Half the rows above are unchanged or changing shape, and the plan is about which half your week sits in. That is a very different problem, and a solvable one.

  • Panic-buying a course

    Do the twenty-minute sorting exercise first. Most people who buy a course before they have done it buy the wrong one, and the free services listed below will tell you the same thing without charging for it.

  • 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 Correspondence Clerks 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:

In US official statistics this job is counted as Correspondence Clerks and Receptionists and Information Clerks. 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.

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

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

The working behind that
No support or contact-centre Space exists.

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 24% 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 customer service adviser. 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.

Nearby moves

The jobs above, as pages you can read the same way as this one. Your job shares its core work with these. That is what the match is, and it is all it is.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for contact centre and customer service work 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 contact centre and customer service work 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 contact centre and customer service work existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for contact centre and customer service work 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 Customer service occupations n.e.c.?
Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 12 official task statements scored for Customer service occupations n.e.c. (United Kingdom, SOC 7219), 24% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 45 out of 100 (range 40–51, band: partial). 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 “Customer service occupations n.e.c.” can AI already do?
The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Answer customer questions by email” (93/100, very high); “Respond to customer enquiries” (79/100, high); “Answer customer questions received via phone, email, and social media platforms” (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 “Customer service occupations n.e.c.” stay human?
About 62% 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: “Establish contacts with employers to create internship and employment opportunities for students” (21/100, low); “Advise students on addressing educational problems” (24/100, low); “Answer in-person enquiries and provide necessary information or assistance” (26/100, low). 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 “Customer service occupations n.e.c.” do about AI?
Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 24% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 62% 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 Customer service occupations n.e.c. 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 12 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.
  • 3 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 2026-08-04.
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 jobDownload this releaseLook 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 . 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.