US dataswitch to UK
Electrical Engineers
designing, implementing, collecting data relating to commercial or residential development and inspecting completed installations and observing operations to ensure conformance to design and equipment specifications and compliance with operational. 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: preparing specifications for purchases of materials or equipment. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.
That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, supervising or training project team members, stays yours. The tools change hands, the accountability doesn't.
Your week, as this page understands it
Research, design, develop, test, or supervise the manufacturing and installation of electrical equipment, components, or systems for commercial, industrial, military, or scientific use. The job title says “electrical engineers”. The real job is the part underneath: supervising or training project team members. 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 electrical engineers is not one task. It is 22 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is supervising or training project team members, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 20%
- changing shape
- 26%
- staying human
- 54%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 41 out of 100 (35–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, across 22 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 electrical engineers 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.
- 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
4 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.
Estimating labor, material or construction costs for budget preparation purposes
This is reading one thing and writing another: labor, material or construction costs in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Estimate labor, material, or construction costs for budget preparation purposes.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 68 out of 100 (61–75 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Cost estimates follow standard methods, but the deciding numbers are local labor and material prices the estimator knows.
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 2/4.
Preparing specifications for purchases of materials or equipment
This is reading one thing and writing another: specifications in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Prepare specifications for purchases of materials or equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Purchase specifications follow standard formats and catalog data, so software can produce a solid draft needing only light checking.
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.
Performing detailed calculations to compute and establish manufacturing
This is reading one thing and writing another: detailed calculations in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Perform detailed calculations to compute and establish manufacturing, construction, or installation standards or specifications.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 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: Standard calculations against published codes are the kind of arithmetic and lookup software handles well, with an engineer checking the result.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Compiling data and writing reports regarding existing or potential electrical engineering studies or projects
This is reading one thing and writing another: data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Compile data and write reports regarding existing or potential electrical engineering studies or projects.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Pulling data together into a written report is one of the things current software does best.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Changing shape
6 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.
Operating computer-assisted engineering or designing software or equipment to perform engineering tasks
The software now makes the first pass at computer-assisted, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Operate computer-assisted engineering or design software or equipment to perform engineering tasks.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 58 out of 100 (51–65 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: Design software still has to be driven by a person, though tools increasingly generate models and scripts from a written brief.
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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing technical drawings
The software now makes the first pass at technical drawings, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Prepare technical drawings, specifications of electrical systems, or topographical maps to ensure that installation and operations conform to standards and customer requirements.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 50 out of 100 (43–57 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: Written specifications come out well from software, but accurate drawings and maps still need an engineer working in design tools.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning or implementing research methodology or procedures to apply principles of electrical theory to engineering projects
The software now makes the first pass at research methodology, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Plan or implement research methodology or procedures to apply principles of electrical theory to engineering projects.” (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: Software can propose a research method from published theory, but choosing and running it on a real project needs an engineer.
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.
Staying human
12 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.
Designing, implementing, maintaining or improving electrical instruments, equipment, facilities, components, products or systems for commercial, industrial or domestic purposes
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for electrical instruments, equipment, facilities, components, products or systems, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Design, implement, maintain, or improve electrical instruments, equipment, facilities, components, products, or systems for commercial, industrial, or domestic purposes.” (O*NET 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; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Software can draft parts of an electrical design, but turning it into a working, safe system still needs an engineer answering for it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Overseeing project production efforts to assure projects are completed on time and within budget
The value here is that a specific person handles project production efforts and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Oversee project production efforts to assure projects are completed on time and within budget.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Schedules and budget reports draft themselves easily, but keeping a project on track means chasing real people and making calls 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 3/4.
Investigating customer or public complaints to determine the nature and extent of problems
The ratings behind this row put customer well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Investigate customer or public complaints to determine the nature and extent of problems.” (O*NET 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: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Working out what went wrong from complaint records suits software, though confirming it usually needs a visit or a call.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Show the other 12 tasks
Collecting data relating to commercial or residential development
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at data, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Collect data relating to commercial or residential development, population, or power system interconnection to determine operating efficiency of electrical systems.” (O*NET 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: Gathering and analyzing system and demand data is standard analysis work, with some readings still taken in the field.
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.
Developing software to control electrical systems
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at software, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Develop software to control electrical systems.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 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: Writing control software is something AI does well, though it has to be proven against the real hardware.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Assisting in developing capital project programs for new equipment or major repairs
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at developing capital project programs, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Assist in developing capital project programs for new equipment or major repairs.” (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: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Building a capital program is mostly analysis and writing, though the priorities come from people inside the organization.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Designing electrical systems or components that minimize electric energy requirements
staying humanThe ratings behind this row put electrical systems well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Design electrical systems or components that minimize electric energy requirements, such as lighting systems designed to account for natural lighting.” (O*NET 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.
The rating behind it: Energy-efficient design uses documented methods and modeling tools, so software can draft it while an engineer owns the result.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing systems that produce electricity with renewable energy sources
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for systems, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Develop systems that produce electricity with renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar, or biofuels.” (O*NET 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; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Renewable systems can be modeled and sized by software, but the finished design carries engineering responsibility and site-specific choices.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Directing or coordinating manufacturing construction, installation, maintenance, support, documentation or testing activities to ensure compliance with specifications, codes or customer requirements
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles construction, installation, maintenance, support and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Direct or coordinate manufacturing, construction, installation, maintenance, support, documentation, or testing activities to ensure compliance with specifications, codes, or customer requirements.” (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; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Coordinating builders, testers and inspectors runs on live relationships and site realities that software can only help document.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Investigating or testing vendors' or competitors' products
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: vendors', in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Investigate or test vendors' or competitors' products.” (O*NET 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: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Reviewing rival products on paper is easy for software, but real testing means someone physically handling the equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conferring with engineers, customers or others to discuss existing or potential engineering projects or products
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles engineers, customers and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Confer with engineers, customers, or others to discuss existing or potential engineering projects or products.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (19–27 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: The value here is the live conversation with colleagues and customers, which software can prepare for but not hold.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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 2/4.
Conducting field surveys or studying maps
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: field surveys, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Conduct field surveys or study maps, graphs, diagrams, or other data to identify and correct power system problems.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 22 out of 100 (15–29 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Studying maps and system data suits software well, but field surveys and corrections need someone out on the network.
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 2/4.
Integrating electrical systems with renewable energy systems to improve overall efficiency
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: electrical systems, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Integrate electrical systems with renewable energy systems to improve overall efficiency.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 22 out of 100 (15–29 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Making two systems work together is largely done on site with the equipment in front of you.
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 2/4.
Supervising or training project team members
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles project team members and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Supervise or train project team members, as necessary.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 17 out of 100 (13–21 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Training and steering team members depends on a working relationship with those particular people.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Inspecting completed installations and observing operations to ensure conformance to design and equipment specifications and compliance with operational
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: completed installations, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Inspect completed installations and observe operations to ensure conformance to design and equipment specifications and compliance with operational, safety, or environmental standards.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (3–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Someone has to be on site looking at the finished installation; software only helps write up what was found.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- $120,630a 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
- 198,750in 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: labor, material or construction costs in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: preparing specifications for purchases of materials or equipment and estimating labor, material or construction costs for budget preparation purposes. What it cannot do is be trusted in person, which is what project team members run on: someone specific doing it and standing behind it. 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: supervising or training project team members is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.
So, given all that: 20% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 26% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 54% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 22 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. Preparing specifications for purchases of materials or equipment 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 labor, material or construction costs, 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 project team members 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 operating computer-assisted engineering or designing software or equipment to perform engineering tasks. 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 electrical engineers (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was electrical and electronics drafters: only about 4% of its durable work is work you already do, it pays 36.3% less and there are far fewer of those jobs than of yours. Your own job splits about 20/80: that share of the list sits in the top exposure band and the rest does not. On this evidence the honest move is inside the job rather than out of it. Become the person who owns “design, implement, maintain, or improve electrical instruments, equipment, facilities, components, products, or…”, and let the exposed end go.
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.
Electrical and Electronics Drafters
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already confer with engineers, customers, or others to discuss existing or potential engineering projects…, and their equivalent is to confer with engineering staff and other personnel to resolve problems. 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. It is a pay cut, in those words: $76,870 against your $120,630, 36.3% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice. And it is a narrow door: about 17,920 of those jobs against 198,750 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 9% as many seats.
Civil Engineers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already inspect completed installations and observe operations to ensure conformance to design and equipment…, and their equivalent is to inspect project sites to monitor progress and ensure conformance to design specifications and…. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $100,840 against your $120,630, 16.4% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Commercial and Industrial Designers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already confer with engineers, customers, or others to discuss existing or potential engineering projects…, and their equivalent is to confer with engineering, marketing, production, or sales departments, or with customers, to establish…. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $83,910 against your $120,630, 30.4% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice. And it is a narrow door: about 33,490 of those jobs against 198,750 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 17% as many seats.
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: 20% of its task weight, across 22 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 supervising or training project team members 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.
If you run a team doing this job
If you run a team doing this job, the conversation you owe them is the one on this page, and sooner than feels comfortable. Show them the ledger rather than a reassurance: the rows moving toward the software are preparing specifications for purchases of materials or equipment, and the rows that are not are where you want your people visible. Ask each of them to do the this-week move and bring the list to your next one-to-one. It turns a rumour into a piece of work, and it tells you which parts of your team's week are actually at stake. And say the thing out loud that a team lead usually leaves unsaid: a shrinking team is your exposure too, so do the move yourself as well.
You are reading the United States figures
The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Electrical engineers 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 Electrical engineers. 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 electrical engineers, 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 20% 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 electrical engineers. 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 electrical engineers 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 Electrical Engineers?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 22 official task statements scored for Electrical Engineers (United States, SOC 17-2071), 20% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 41 out of 100 (range 35–47, 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 “Electrical Engineers” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Prepare specifications for purchases of materials or equipment” (75/100, high); “Compile data and write reports regarding existing or potential electrical engineering studies or projects” (75/100, high); “Estimate labor, material, or construction costs for budget preparation purposes” (68/100, 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 “Electrical Engineers” stay human?
- About 54% 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: “Inspect completed installations and observe operations to ensure conformance to design and equipment specifications and compliance with operational, safety,…” (7/100, minimal); “Supervise or train project team members, as necessary” (17/100, minimal); “Integrate electrical systems with renewable energy systems to improve overall efficiency” (22/100, 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 “Electrical Engineers” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 20% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 54% 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 Electrical Engineers 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 22 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.
- 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 2026-08-04.
- 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.