Will AI replace Fishmongers and poultry dressers?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 32 official task statements scored for Fishmongers and poultry dressers (United Kingdom, SOC 5433), 5% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 7 out of 100 (range 6–11, band: minimal). 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 “Fishmongers and poultry dressers” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Stay updated on market trends and factors that impact the availability and price of fish and shellfish” (75/100, high); “Assist in managing customer data and providing excellent customer service” (64/100, high); “Coordinate and monitor the receipt, order, assembly and despatch of goods” (56/100, partial). 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 “Fishmongers and poultry dressers” stay human?

About 94% 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: “Mince meat for sausages, luncheon meats, and other meat products” (0/100, minimal); “Wash carcasses in preparation for further processing or packaging” (0/100, minimal); “Distribute specified meat or carcass to designated areas” (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 “Fishmongers and poultry dressers” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 5% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 94% 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 Fishmongers and poultry dressers 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 32 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

Fishmongers and poultry dressers

preparing fish and shellfish for sale, operating knives for meat cutting and receiving and handling raw materials. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: butchering and preparing animals, fowl or shellfish for cooking is work software can't reach.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 5%
changing shape: 2%
staying human: 94%

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

Whole-job exposure score 7 out of 100 (6–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, across 32 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 fishmongers and poultry dressers 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.

What shifts is staying updated on market trends and factors that impact the availability and price of fish and shellfish: the overhead at the edges, not the middle you trained for.

Your week, as this page understands it

Fishmongers and poultry dressers clean, cut and prepare fish and poultry for processing or sale. The job title says “fishmongers” or “poultry dressers”: officially one job, two names. The real job is the part underneath: butchering and preparing animals, fowl or shellfish for cooking. 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 fishmongers and poultry dressers is not one task. It is 32 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is butchering and preparing animals, fowl or shellfish for cooking, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 5%
changing shape: 2%
staying human: 94%

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.

15 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

2 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.

Staying updated on market trends and factors that impact the availability and price of fish and shellfish
This is reading one thing and writing another: updated in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 70 · 5433/01
Source: “Stay updated on market trends and factors that impact the availability and price of fish and shellfish.” (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: Landings, prices and supply reports are published regularly, so tracking market conditions is reading and summarising.
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.
Assisting in managing customer data and providing excellent customer service
This is reading one thing and writing another: managing customer data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 60 · 5433/01
Source: “Assist in managing customer data and providing excellent customer service.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 64 out of 100 (60–68 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: Customer records and replies are standard admin that software handles well.
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.

Changing shape

1 task

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.

Coordinating and monitoring the receipt
The software now makes the first pass at the receipt, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 50 · 5433/01
Source: “Coordinate and monitor the receipt, order, assembly and despatch of goods.” (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: Tracking what comes in, gets made up and goes out is stock record work that 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.

Staying human

29 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.

Butchering and preparing animals, fowl or shellfish for cooking
This work happens in the physical world: animals, fowl or shellfish, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 5433/01, 5433/02
Source: “Butcher and prepare animals, fowl, or shellfish for cooking.” (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: Butchering and preparing animals or shellfish is physical work with knives.
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.
Operating knives for meat cutting
This work happens in the physical world: knives, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 5433/01, 5433/02
Source: “Operate knives for meat cutting.” (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: Using knives on meat is hand skill.
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.
Cutting and trimming meats to prepare them for cooking
This work happens in the physical world: meats, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 5433/01, 5433/02
Source: “Cut and trim meats to prepare them for cooking.” (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: Trimming meat is skilled knife work done by 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 2/4.
Cutting meat into standard cuts for sale
This work happens in the physical world: meat, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 5433/01, 5433/02
Source: “Cut meat into standard cuts for sale.” (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: Cutting meat into standard cuts takes a knife, a steady hand and the carcass 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 2/4.
Filleting meat or fish for ready-to-heat meals
This work happens in the physical world: meat, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 5433/01, 5433/02
Source: “Filleting meat or fish for ready-to-heat meals.” (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: Filleting is precise knife work on a real fish or joint.
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.
Cutting carcasses in a meat processing factory
This work happens in the physical world: carcasses, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 5433/01, 5433/02
Source: “Cut carcasses in a meat processing factory.” (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: Cutting carcasses in a factory is physical knife and saw 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.
Sealing containers to maintain freshness of fish or poultry
This work happens in the physical world: containers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 5433/01, 5433/02
Source: “Seal containers to maintain freshness of fish or poultry.” (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: Sealing containers is a physical packing step at the bench.
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.

Show the other 22 tasks

Monitoring stock levels, rotate stock and maintaining accurate stock control records
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: stock levels, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 5433/01
Source: “Monitor stock levels, rotate stock, and maintain accurate stock control records.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 38 out of 100 (31–45 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: The records are easy for software, but rotating stock means moving it yourself.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Taking customer orders to ensure product availability
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: customer orders, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 5433/01
Source: “Take customer orders to ensure product availability.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 32 out of 100 (25–39 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: Order-taking can be automated for phone and online, but the counter trade happens face to face with the customer.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Resolving customer complaints about seafood quality
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles customer complaints and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 50 · 5433/01
Source: “Resolve customer complaints about seafood quality.” (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: Putting right a complaint about bad fish depends on how the customer is handled in the moment.
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.
Ensuring adherence to health and safety protocols in the handling
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: adherence, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 5433/01
Source: “Ensure adherence to health and safety protocols in the handling, preparation, and sale of fish and shellfish.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 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: Food safety rules and records can be drafted by software, but making sure they are followed means being on the shop floor.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing fish and shellfish for sale
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: fish, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 5433/01
Source: “Prepare fish and shellfish for sale.” (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: Gutting, trimming and displaying fish is skilled knife work with the actual product 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 1/4.
Cleaning fish processing tools and equipment
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: fish processing tools, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 5433/01
Source: “Clean fish processing tools and equipment.” (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: Washing down knives, boards and machines is physical cleaning in the shop or plant.
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.
Producing fish burgers and seafood trimmings for sale
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: fish burgers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 5433/01
Source: “Produce fish burgers and seafood trimmings for sale.” (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: Making burgers and trimmings from fish is hands-on food preparation.
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.
Receiving and handling raw materials
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: raw materials, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 5433/01
Source: “Receive and handle raw materials, ensuring food safety and quality standards are met.” (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: Taking in and handling raw materials is physical goods 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 2/4.
Creating cutting tools for filleting fish
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: tools, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 5433/01
Source: “Create cutting tools for filleting fish.” (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: Making and shaping a filleting knife is hands-on toolmaking.
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.
Inspecting meat products
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: meat products, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 5433/01, 5433/02
Source: “Inspect meat products for defects, bruises, or blemishes.” (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: Spotting bruises and blemishes means handling and turning each piece of meat yourself.
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.
Receiving deliveries
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: deliveries, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 5433/01
Source: “Receive deliveries.” (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: Taking in deliveries means being at the loading bay.
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.
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 50 · 5433/01
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.
Moving stock to cold storage areas
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: stock, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 5433/01
Source: “Move stock to cold storage areas.” (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: Moving stock into the cold room is physical 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 2/4.
Separating meats and by-products into specified containers
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: meats, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 5433/01, 5433/02
Source: “Separate meats and by-products into specified containers.” (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: Sorting meat and by-products into the right containers is physical handling at the line.
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.
Using cleavers for chopping meat
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: cleavers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 5433/01, 5433/02
Source: “Use cleavers for chopping meat.” (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: Chopping with a cleaver is manual work that needs a person holding the blade.
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.
Weighing meats
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: meats, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 5433/01, 5433/02
Source: “Weigh meats.” (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: Weighing means putting the product on the scale, which someone has to do by hand.
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.
Slicing carcasses for future processing
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: carcasses, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 5433/02
Source: “Slice carcasses for future processing.” (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: Slicing carcasses is physical cutting 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.
Shaving or singing and defeather carcasses in preparation for further processing
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: defeather carcasses, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 5433/02
Source: “Shave or singe and defeather carcasses in preparation for further processing.” (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: Singeing and defeathering are hands-on carcass preparation.
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.
Creating cutting tools for processing poultry
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: tools, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 5433/02
Source: “Create cutting tools for processing poultry.” (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: Making poultry-cutting tools is hands-on toolmaking.
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.
Distributing specified meat or carcass to designated areas
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: specified meat, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 5433/02
Source: “Distribute specified meat or carcass to designated areas.” (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: Carrying carcasses and cuts to the right area is physical movement of heavy product.
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.
Washing carcasses in preparation for further processing or packaging
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: carcasses, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 5433/02
Source: “Wash carcasses in preparation for further processing or packaging.” (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: Washing carcasses is physical 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.
Mincing meat for sausages, luncheon meats and other meat products
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: meat, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 50 · 5433/02
Source: “Mince meat for sausages, luncheon meats, and other meat products.” (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: Mincing for sausages and cold cuts is physical machine 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 2/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: £25,400a 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: 4,900in 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: managing customer data in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: staying updated on market trends and factors that impact the availability and price of fish and shellfish and assisting in managing customer data and providing excellent customer service. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where animals, fowl or shellfish 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

Start with what does not change: butchering and preparing animals, fowl or shellfish for cooking is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 5% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 2% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 94% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 32 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. Staying updated on market trends and factors that impact the availability and price of fish and shellfish 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 managing customer data, 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 animals, fowl or shellfish are 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 coordinating and monitoring the receipt. 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 fishmongers and poultry dressers (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was butchers: only about 32% of its durable work is work you already do. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 7/100 here, with only 5% of the task list in the top band, and “prepare fish and shellfish for sale” 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.

Butchers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “cut meat into standard cuts for sale”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 32% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: It is closer than most, and still not close enough: about 32% of that job's durable work is already yours, against the 35% I want to see before I will call something a route.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Chefs
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “learn fundamental cooking techniques”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 7% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 7% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
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: “butcher and prepare animals, fowl, or shellfish for cooking”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 6% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 6% 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: 5% of its task weight, across 32 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 butchering and preparing animals, fowl or shellfish for cooking 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 Butchers and Meat Cutters 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 Butchers and Meat Cutters, Meat, Poultry, and Fish Cutters and Trimmers, Slaughterers and Meat Packers and Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders. 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

Why there is no community here

Collab365, who build this site, run paid Spaces for a small number of subjects, and none of them is built for this job. We are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

So the free services listed on this page are the whole answer, and it is the same answer we would give a friend.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for fishmongers / poultry dressers 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 fishmongers / poultry dressers 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 fishmongers / poultry dressers 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 fishmongers / poultry dressers 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 Fishmongers and poultry dressers?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 32 official task statements scored for Fishmongers and poultry dressers (United Kingdom, SOC 5433), 5% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 7 out of 100 (range 6–11, band: minimal). 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 “Fishmongers and poultry dressers” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Stay updated on market trends and factors that impact the availability and price of fish and shellfish” (75/100, high); “Assist in managing customer data and providing excellent customer service” (64/100, high); “Coordinate and monitor the receipt, order, assembly and despatch of goods” (56/100, partial). 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 “Fishmongers and poultry dressers” stay human?: About 94% 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: “Mince meat for sausages, luncheon meats, and other meat products” (0/100, minimal); “Wash carcasses in preparation for further processing or packaging” (0/100, minimal); “Distribute specified meat or carcass to designated areas” (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 “Fishmongers and poultry dressers” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 5% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 94% 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 Fishmongers and poultry dressers 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 32 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.
15 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 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.