US dataswitch to UK

Engineering Technologists and Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other

interpreting or evaluating test results in accordance with applicable codes, splicing fibers, using fusion splicing or other techniques, setting up or operating prototype or testing apparatus and performing diagnostic analyses of processing steps. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: conducting liquid penetrant tests to locate surface cracks by coating objects with fluorescent dyes 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: 12%
changing shape: 10%
staying human: 78%

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

Whole-job exposure score 19 out of 100 (15–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, across 40 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 engineering technologists and technicians, except drafters, all other 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.

What shifts is documenting non-destructive testing methods, processes or results: the paper around the work, not the work.

Your week, as this page understands it

All engineering technologists and technicians, except drafters, not listed separately. The job title says “engineering technologists”, “technicians”, “except drafters” or “all other”: officially one job, several names. The real job is the part underneath: conducting liquid penetrant tests to locate surface cracks by coating objects with fluorescent dyes. 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 engineering technologists and technicians, except drafters, all other is not one task. It is 40 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is conducting liquid penetrant tests to locate surface cracks by coating objects with fluorescent dyes, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 12%
changing shape: 10%
staying human: 78%

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 2026-08-05. 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.

Shifting to AI

4 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.

Documenting non-destructive testing methods, processes or results
This is reading one thing and writing another: non-destructive testing methods, processes or results in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Document non-destructive testing methods, processes, or results.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 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: Documenting methods, processes and results is writing work software does well.
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.
Computing or recording photonic test data
This is reading one thing and writing another: photonic test data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Compute or record photonic test data.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 62 out of 100 (58–66 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: Computing and recording test figures is arithmetic and data entry.
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 4/4.
Documenting procedures, such as calibration of optical or fiber optic equipment
This is reading one thing and writing another: procedures in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Document procedures, such as calibration of optical or fiber optic 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: Writing up calibration procedures is documentation work AI drafts 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 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring inventory levels and ordering supplies
This is reading one thing and writing another: inventory levels in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Monitor inventory levels and order supplies as necessary.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 62 out of 100 (58–66 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: Watching stock levels and placing orders is routine system work.
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 4/4.

Changing shape

3 tasks

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

Interpreting or evaluating test results in accordance with applicable codes
The software now makes the first pass at test results, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Interpret or evaluate test results in accordance with applicable codes, standards, specifications, or procedures.” (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; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Comparing results against written codes is documented work, though a certified person normally decides.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing reports on non-destructive testing results
The software now makes the first pass at reports, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Prepare reports on non-destructive testing results.” (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; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Writing up results is straightforward, though a qualified inspector normally has to stand behind the report.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Recommending optical or optic equipment design or material changes to reduce costs or processing times
The software now makes the first pass at optical, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Recommend optical or optic equipment design or material changes to reduce costs or processing times.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Suggesting cheaper materials or design changes is analysis AI can draft from documented properties.
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 3/4.

Staying human

33 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.

Interpreting the results of all methods of non-destructive testing
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for the results of all methods of non-destructive, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Interpret the results of all methods of non-destructive testing (NDT), such as acoustic emission, electromagnetic, leak, liquid penetrant, magnetic particle, neutron radiographic, radiographic, thermal or infrared, ultrasonic, vibration analysis, and visual testing.” (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 suggest what a trace shows, but certified inspectors are expected to read these results themselves.
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.
Selecting, calibrating or operating equipment used in the non-destructive testing of products or materials
This work happens in the physical world: equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Select, calibrate, or operate equipment used in the non-destructive testing of products or materials.” (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; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Calibrating and operating the test gear is hands-on, even though picking the method is documented.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Conducting liquid penetrant tests to locate surface cracks by coating objects with fluorescent dyes
This work happens in the physical world: liquid penetrant tests, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Conduct liquid penetrant tests to locate surface cracks by coating objects with fluorescent dyes, cleaning excess penetrant, and applying developer.” (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: Coating, cleaning and developing a part 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 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

Show the other 30 tasks

Assisting engineers in the development of new products
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: engineers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Assist engineers in the development of new products, fixtures, tools, or processes.” (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: AI can suggest design options, but much of the help engineers need is practical work in the lab.
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.
Developing or using new non-destructive testing methods
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: new non-destructive testing methods, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Develop or use new non-destructive testing methods, such as acoustic emission testing, leak testing, and thermal or infrared testing.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Developing a new testing method needs experiments on real material as well as reading.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Assisting scientists or engineers in the conduct of photonic experiments
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: scientists, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Assist scientists or engineers in the conduct of photonic experiments.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 16 out of 100 (9–23 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Assisting with experiments mostly means being in the lab doing the practical steps.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Testing or performing failure analysis for optomechanical or optoelectrical products
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: failure analysis, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Test or perform failure analysis for optomechanical or optoelectrical products, according to test plans.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 14 out of 100 (7–21 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Failure analysis is partly desk work, but the testing itself is done on the bench.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Performing diagnostic analyses of processing steps
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: diagnostic analyses of processing steps, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Perform diagnostic analyses of processing steps, using analytical or metrological tools, such as microscopy, profilometry, or ellipsometry devices.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 14 out of 100 (7–21 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Microscopes and profilometers have to be operated on the samples, though the analysis is partly computational.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Laying out cutting lines
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: cutting lines, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Lay out cutting lines for machining, using drafting tools.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 14 out of 100 (7–21 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Working out the cutting lines is geometry, but marking them out is done on the material.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Evaluating material properties, using radio astronomy, voltage and amperage measurement or rheometric flow measurement
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: material properties, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Evaluate material properties, using radio astronomy, voltage and amperage measurement, or rheometric flow measurement.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (1–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, low confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Measuring material properties requires the samples and instruments to be handled.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Visuallying examine materials, structures or components for signs of corrosion, metal fatigue, cracks or other flaws
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: examine materials, structures or components, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Visually examine materials, structures, or components for signs of corrosion, metal fatigue, cracks, or other flaws, using tools and equipment such as endoscopes, closed-circuit television systems, and fiber optics.” (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; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Software reads the images well, but someone still has to get the scope or camera to the part.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Identifying defects in concrete or other building materials
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: defects, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Identify defects in concrete or other building materials, using thermal or infrared testing.” (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; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Thermal images can be read by software, but the scanning happens on the structure.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Designing, building or modifying fixtures used to assemble parts
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: fixtures, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Design, build, or modify fixtures used to assemble parts.” (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: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: A fixture can be designed on screen, but building and fitting it is workshop work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Optimizing photonic process parameters by making prototype or production devices
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: photonic process parameters, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Optimize photonic process parameters by making prototype or production devices.” (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: mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Tuning the process means actually building sample devices and seeing how they come out.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Supervising or directing the work of non-destructive testing trainees or staff
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the work of non-destructive testing trainees, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Supervise or direct the work of non-destructive testing trainees or staff.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (1–15 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Directing trainees depends on a working relationship with the people being taught.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Producing images of objects on film
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: images of objects, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Produce images of objects on film, using radiographic techniques.” (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: Producing film images requires handling the equipment and the object.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Mapping the presence of imperfections within objects
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: the presence of imperfections within objects, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Map the presence of imperfections within objects, using sonic measurements.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–7 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Mapping flaws inside an object means scanning it with a hand-held probe.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Making radiographic images to detect flaws in objects while leaving objects intact
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: radiographic images, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Make radiographic images to detect flaws in objects while leaving objects intact.” (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: Taking a radiographic image means setting up the source and the object in person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Identifying defects in solid materials
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: defects, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Identify defects in solid materials, using ultrasonic testing techniques.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–7 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Finding flaws means moving an ultrasonic probe across the actual material by hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Examining structures or vehicles, aircraft, trains, nuclear reactors, bridges, dams and pipelines, using non-destructive testing techniques
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: structures, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Examine structures or vehicles such as aircraft, trains, nuclear reactors, bridges, dams, and pipelines, using non-destructive testing techniques.” (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: Examining aircraft, bridges or pipelines means travelling to them and working on them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Maintaining clean working environments, according to clean room standards
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: clean working environments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Maintain clean working environments, according to clean room standards.” (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: Keeping a clean room to standard means physically cleaning and gowning in it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Mixing, pouring or using processing chemicals or gases according to safety standards or established operating procedures
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: chemicals, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Mix, pour, or use processing chemicals or gases according to safety standards or established operating procedures.” (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: Handling processing chemicals and gases 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.
Assembling or adjusting parts or related electrical units of prototypes to prepare for testing
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: parts, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Assemble or adjust parts or related electrical units of prototypes to prepare for testing.” (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: Assembling and adjusting prototype parts is physical.
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.
Splicing fibers, using fusion splicing or other techniques
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: fibers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Splice fibers, using fusion splicing or other techniques.” (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: Splicing fibers is precise handwork.
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.
Terminating cure, polish or testing fiber cables with mechanical connectors
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: cure, polish or testing fiber cables, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Terminate, cure, polish, or test fiber cables with mechanical connectors.” (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: Terminating, polishing and testing fiber cables is handwork.
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.
Setting up or operating prototype or testing apparatus
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: or operating prototype, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Set up or operate prototype or test apparatus, such as control consoles, collimators, recording equipment, or cables.” (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: Rigging up consoles, cables and test apparatus is hands-on.
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.
Setting up or operating assembly or processing equipment
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: or operating assembly or processing equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Set up or operate assembly or processing equipment, such as lasers, cameras, die bonders, wire bonders, dispensers, reflow ovens, soldering irons, die shears, wire pull testers, temperature or humidity chambers, or optical spectrum analyzers.” (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: Setting up and running bonders, ovens and soldering gear is physical.
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.
Repairing or calibrating products, such as surgical lasers
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: products, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Repair or calibrate products, such as surgical lasers.” (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: Repairing or calibrating a laser means having it 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.
Fabricating devices, such as optoelectronic or semiconductor devices
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: devices, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Fabricate devices, such as optoelectronic or semiconductor devices.” (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: Fabricating devices is production work at a bench or in a fab.
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.
Building prototype optomechanical devices for use in equipment
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: prototype optomechanical devices, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Build prototype optomechanical devices for use in equipment such as aerial cameras, gun sights, or telescopes.” (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: Building prototype optical devices is bench 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.
Assembling fiber optical, optoelectronic or free-space optics components, subcomponents, assemblies or subassemblies
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: fiber optical, optoelectronic or free-space optics components, subcomponents, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Assemble fiber optical, optoelectronic, or free-space optics components, subcomponents, assemblies, or subassemblies.” (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: Assembling optical components is fine handwork.
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.
Adjusting or maintaining equipment, such as lasers, laser systems, microscopes, oscilloscopes, pulse generators, power meters, beam analyzers or energy measurement devices
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Adjust or maintain equipment, such as lasers, laser systems, microscopes, oscilloscopes, pulse generators, power meters, beam analyzers, or energy measurement devices.” (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: Adjusting lasers, microscopes and meters requires hands on 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 2/4.
Assembling components of energy-efficient optical communications systems involving photonic switches
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: components of energy-efficient optical communications systems involving photonic, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Assemble components of energy-efficient optical communications systems involving photonic switches, optical backplanes, or optoelectronic interfaces.” (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: Assembling optical communication hardware is manual assembly.
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: $78,350a 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: 59,930in 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: non-destructive testing methods, processes or results in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: documenting non-destructive testing methods, processes or results and computing or recording photonic test data. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where liquid penetrant tests 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: conducting liquid penetrant tests to locate surface cracks by coating objects with fluorescent dyes is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 12% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 10% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 78% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 40 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. Documenting non-destructive testing methods, processes or results 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 non-destructive testing methods, processes or results, 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 liquid penetrant tests 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 interpreting or evaluating test results in accordance with applicable codes. 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 engineering technologists and technicians, except drafters, all other (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was mechanical engineering technologists and technicians: only about 5% of its durable work is work you already do. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 19/100 here, with only 12% of the task list in the top band, and “interpret or evaluate test results in accordance with applicable codes, standards, specifications…” 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.

Mechanical Engineering Technologists and Technicians
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already interpret or evaluate test results in accordance with applicable codes, standards, specifications, or…, and their equivalent is to set up mechanical, hydraulic, or electric test equipment in accordance with engineering specifications…. Across both published task lists that is about 5% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 5% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Industrial Engineering Technologists and Technicians
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already select, calibrate, or operate equipment used in the non-destructive testing of products or…, and their equivalent is to calibrate nanotechnology equipment. 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: $66,120 against your $78,350, 15.6% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Engineers, All Other
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already compute or record photonic test data, and their equivalent is to develop or test photonic prototypes or models. Across both published task lists that is about 2% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 2% 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: 12% of its task weight, across 40 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 conducting liquid penetrant tests to locate surface cracks by coating objects with fluorescent dyes 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 Quality assurance technicians 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

The other groups this work is counted across:

In UK official statistics this job is counted as Quality assurance technicians, Science, engineering and production technicians n.e.c., Engineering technicians and Non-commissioned officers and other ranks. 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.

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:
American Job Center locator
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
- CareerOneStop local help hub
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop
Free

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

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for engineering technologists / technicians / except drafters / all other, 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 12% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.

Try The AI Authority free →

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

The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for engineering technologists / technicians / except drafters / all other. 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 engineering technologists / technicians / except drafters / all other 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 engineering technologists / technicians / except drafters / all other 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 engineering technologists / technicians / except drafters / all other 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 engineering technologists / technicians / except drafters / all other 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 Engineering Technologists and Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 40 official task statements scored for Engineering Technologists and Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other (United States, SOC 17-3029), 12% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 19 out of 100 (range 15–25, 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 “Engineering Technologists and Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Document procedures, such as calibration of optical or fiber optic equipment” (75/100, high); “Document non-destructive testing methods, processes, or results” (66/100, high); “Monitor inventory levels and order supplies as necessary” (62/100, 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 “Engineering Technologists and Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other” stay human?: About 78% 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: “Assemble components of energy-efficient optical communications systems involving photonic switches, optical backplanes, or optoelectronic interfaces” (0/100, minimal); “Adjust or maintain equipment, such as lasers, laser systems, microscopes, oscilloscopes, pulse generators, power meters, beam analyzers, or energy measuremen…” (0/100, minimal); “Assemble fiber optical, optoelectronic, or free-space optics components, subcomponents, assemblies, or subassemblies” (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 “Engineering Technologists and Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 12% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 78% 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 Engineering Technologists and Technicians, Except Drafters, All Other 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 40 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

2 tasks scored differently between repeat runs, so their range on this page is wider. We would rather show the wobble than hide it.
One row is marked low confidence, so treat it as a ballpark rather than a fine measurement.
The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
5 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.

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.