US dataswitch to UK
Barbers
cleaning and sterilizing scissors, combs, clippers and other instruments, recording services provided on cashiers' tickets or receiving payment from customers and performing clerical and administrative duties. If that's your week, this page is about your job.
The honest answer
AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: cleaning and sterilizing scissors, combs, clippers and other instruments is work software can't reach.
What shifts is ordering supplies: the overhead at the edges, not the middle you trained for.
Your week, as this page understands it
Provide barbering services, such as cutting, trimming, shampooing, and styling hair; trimming beards; or giving shaves. The job title says “barbers”. The real job is the part underneath: cleaning and sterilizing scissors, combs, clippers and other instruments. 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 barbers is not one task. It is 18 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is cleaning and sterilizing scissors, combs, clippers and other instruments, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 8%
- changing shape
- 11%
- staying human
- 80%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 18 out of 100 (15–23 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, across 18 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 barbers 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 2026-08-05. 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.
- 2 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 tasksTasks 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.
Ordering supplies
This is reading one thing and writing another: supplies in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Order supplies.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 69 out of 100 (62–76 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: Reordering shop supplies is routine purchasing that software handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · 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.
Keeping card files on clientele
This is reading one thing and writing another: card files in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Keep card files on clientele, recording notes of work done, products used and fees charged after each visit.” (O*NET 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: Keeping client notes of past cuts, products and prices is straightforward record work software does well.
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 tasksTasks 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.
Staying informed of the latest styles and hair care techniques
The software now makes the first pass at informed of the latest styles, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Stay informed of the latest styles and hair care techniques.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Trends are easy to read about, but barbers mainly learn new techniques by watching and practising them.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Performing clerical and administrative duties
The software now makes the first pass at clerical and administrative duties, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Perform clerical and administrative duties such as keeping records, paying bills, and hiring and supervising personnel.” (O*NET 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: Records, bills and staffing paperwork is ordinary office work that software drafts and manages 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
14 tasksTasks 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.
Cleaning and sterilizing scissors, combs, clippers and other instruments
This work happens in the physical world: scissors, combs, clippers and other instruments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Clean and sterilize scissors, combs, clippers, and other instruments.” (O*NET 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: Cleaning and sterilising tools is hands-on work at the station.
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 and trimming hair according to clients' instructions or current hairstyles
This work happens in the physical world: hair, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Cut and trim hair according to clients' instructions or current hairstyles, using clippers, combs, hand-held blow driers, and scissors.” (O*NET 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 hair is skilled hand work on someone sitting in the chair.
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.
Draping and pinning protective cloths around customers' shoulders
This work happens in the physical world: protective cloths around customers' shoulders, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Drape and pin protective cloths around customers' shoulders.” (O*NET 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: Draping and pinning a cloth around a customer is done by hand, on the person.
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.
Cleaning work stations and sweep floors
This work happens in the physical world: work stations, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Clean work stations and sweep floors.” (O*NET 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: Sweeping up and cleaning the station is physical work in the shop.
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.
Questioning patrons regarding desired services and haircut styles
This work happens in the physical world: patrons regarding desired services, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Question patrons regarding desired services and haircut styles.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (6–20 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 value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: The questions themselves are simple, but this conversation happens with the customer in the chair and shapes the cut.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · 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 3/4.
Shaping and trimming beards and moustaches
This work happens in the physical world: beards, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Shape and trim beards and moustaches, using scissors.” (O*NET 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 beards and moustaches is precise hand work on the customer.
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.
Show the other 8 tasks
Recording services provided on cashiers' tickets or receiving payment from customers
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: services, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Record services provided on cashiers' tickets or receive payment from customers.” (O*NET 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: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Tills and card readers already handle most of this, though payment is usually taken in person at the counter.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · 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.
Suggesting treatments to alleviate hair problems
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: treatments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Suggest treatments to alleviate hair problems.” (O*NET 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: Common hair problems and remedies are well documented, but the diagnosis needs looking at the scalp.
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.
Recommending and selling lotions, tonics or other cosmetic supplies
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: lotions, tonics or other cosmetic supplies, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Recommend and sell lotions, tonics, or other cosmetic supplies.” (O*NET 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: Product suggestions are easy to generate, but the sale happens face to face with someone who trusts the barber.
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.
Shampooing hair
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: hair, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Shampoo hair.” (O*NET 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 someone's hair is done with hands at the basin.
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.
Curling color or straightening hair, using special chemical solutions and equipment
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: color, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Curl, color, or straighten hair, using special chemical solutions and equipment.” (O*NET 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: Colouring and chemical straightening is applied by hand to a customer's hair.
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.
Applying lather and shave beards or neck and temple hair contours
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: lather, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Apply lather and shave beards or neck and temple hair contours, using razors.” (O*NET 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: Shaving with a razor is delicate hand work on a person's face.
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.
Providing face, neck and scalp massages
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: face, neck and scalp massages, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Provide face, neck, and scalp massages.” (O*NET 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: Massage is done with hands on the client.
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 1/4.
Providing skin care and nail treatments
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: skin care, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Provide skin care and nail treatments.” (O*NET 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: Skin and nail treatments are performed by hand on the customer.
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.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- $38,210a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this
Source: bls-oews
Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
Rounding: Shown as published.
- People doing this job
- 15,000in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
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: card files in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: ordering supplies and keeping card files on clientele. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where scissors, combs, clippers and other instruments 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: cleaning and sterilizing scissors, combs, clippers and other instruments is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.
So, given all that: 8% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 11% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 80% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 18 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. Ordering supplies 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 card files, 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 scissors, combs, clippers and other instruments are in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no license 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 staying informed of the latest styles and hair care techniques. 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, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, 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 US occupations to barbers (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was hairdressers, hairstylists, and cosmetologists: only about 25% of its durable work is work you already do. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 18/100 here, with only 8% of the task list in the top band, and “clean and sterilize scissors, combs, clippers, and other instruments” 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 830 US 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.
Hairdressers, Hairstylists, and Cosmetologists
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already shape and trim beards and moustaches, using scissors, and their equivalent is to shave, trim, and shape beards and moustaches. Across both published task lists that is about 25% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: It is closer than most, and still not close enough: about 25% of that job's durable work is already yours, against the 35% I want to see before I will call something a route.
Skincare Specialists
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already clean and sterilize scissors, combs, clippers, and other instruments, and their equivalent is to sterilize equipment and clean work areas. Across both published task lists that is about 10% of the durable work in that job.
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.
Janitors and Cleaners, Except Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already clean work stations and sweep floors, and their equivalent is to clean building floors by sweeping, mopping, scrubbing, or vacuuming. Across both published task lists that is about 8% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 8% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
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: 8% of its task weight, across 18 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 cleaning and sterilizing scissors, combs, clippers and other instruments 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 States figures
The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Hairdressers and barbers is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.
Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match
In UK official statistics this job is counted as Hairdressers and barbers. Pay and employment stay on this page’s own group; the task list and the scores do not cross over.
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.
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
Free
No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it
Nothing Collab365 runs is built for barbers, 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 8% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.
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 barbers. 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 barbers 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 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 Barbers?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 18 official task statements scored for Barbers (United States, SOC 39-5011), 8% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 18 out of 100 (range 15–23, 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 “Barbers” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Keep card files on clientele, recording notes of work done, products used and fees charged after each visit” (93/100, very high); “Order supplies” (69/100, high); “Perform clerical and administrative duties such as keeping records, paying bills, and hiring and supervising personnel” (48/100, 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 “Barbers” stay human?
- About 80% 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: “Provide skin care and nail treatments” (0/100, minimal); “Provide face, neck, and scalp massages” (0/100, minimal); “Apply lather and shave beards or neck and temple hair contours, using razors” (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 “Barbers” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 8% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 80% 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 Barbers 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 18 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
Worth knowing about these figures
- The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
- 2 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
- onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
- Task weights
- onet-db (im-rt)
- Scores
- Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
- Pay and employment
- bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))
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.
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}
}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.