Will AI replace Etchers and Engravers?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 26 official task statements scored for Etchers and Engravers (United States, SOC 51-9194), 4% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 10 out of 100 (range 8–16, 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 “Etchers and Engravers” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Use computer software to design patterns for engraving” (75/100, high); “Measure and compute dimensions of lettering, designs, or patterns to be engraved” (38/100, low); “Examine sketches, diagrams, samples, blueprints, or photographs to decide how designs are to be etched, cut, or engraved onto workpieces” (38/100, low). 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 “Etchers and Engravers” stay human?

About 96% 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: “Expose workpieces to acid to develop etch patterns such as designs, lettering, or figures” (0/100, minimal); “Brush or wipe acid over engraving to darken or highlight inscriptions” (0/100, minimal); “Fill etched characters with opaque paste to improve readability” (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 “Etchers and Engravers” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 4% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 96% 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 Etchers and Engravers 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 26 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.

US dataswitch to UK

Etchers and Engravers

inspecting etched work for depth of etching, measuring and computing dimensions of lettering and neutralizing workpieces to remove acid. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: inspecting etched work for depth of etching 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: 4%
changing shape: 0%
staying human: 96%

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

Whole-job exposure score 10 out of 100 (8–16 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, across 26 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 etchers and engravers 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 using computer software to design patterns for engraving: the overhead at the edges, not the middle you trained for.

Your week, as this page understands it

Engrave or etch metal, wood, rubber, or other materials. Includes such workers as etcher-circuit processors, pantograph engravers, and silk screen etchers. The job title says “etchers” or “engravers”: officially one job, two names. The real job is the part underneath: inspecting etched work for depth of etching. 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 etchers and engravers is not one task. It is 26 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is inspecting etched work for depth of etching, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 4%
changing shape: 0%
staying human: 96%

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.

1 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Shifting to AI

1 task

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.

Using computer software to design patterns for engraving
This is reading one thing and writing another: computer software in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Use computer software to design patterns for engraving.” (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: Drawing engraving patterns in design software is exactly the kind of screen work AI tools now do 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.

Changing shape

0 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.

Nothing in this job’s scored task list landed in this group. That is the measurement, not an editorial choice, and it is worth knowing either way.

Staying human

25 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.

Inspecting etched work for depth of etching
This work happens in the physical world: etched work, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Inspect etched work for depth of etching, uniformity, and defects, using calibrated microscopes, gauges, fingers, or magnifying lenses.” (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 rating behind it: Checking etch depth and defects means having the piece under a lens or between your fingers at the bench.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Examining sketches, diagrams, samples, blueprints or photographs to decide how designs are to be etched, cut or engraved onto workpieces
The ratings behind this row put sketches, diagrams, samples, blueprints or photographs well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Examine sketches, diagrams, samples, blueprints, or photographs to decide how designs are to be etched, cut, or engraved onto workpieces.” (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: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Reading drawings and photos to plan an engraving is thinking work software can rough out, though shop know-how decides the final 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 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Examining engraving for quality of cut
This work happens in the physical world: quality of cut, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Examine engraving for quality of cut, burrs, rough spots, and irregular or incomplete engraving.” (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 rating behind it: Spotting burrs and rough cuts means having the piece in front of you and often in your hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Printing proofs or examining designs to verify accuracy of engraving
This work happens in the physical world: proofs, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Print proofs or examine designs to verify accuracy of engraving, and rework engraving as required.” (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 rating behind it: Pulling proofs and reworking the engraving means being at the machine with the piece.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Measuring and computing dimensions of lettering
This work happens in the physical world: dimensions, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Measure and compute dimensions of lettering, designs, or patterns to be engraved.” (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; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: The arithmetic and layout sizing is straightforward for software, though someone still has to measure the actual piece.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Cleaning and polishing engraved areas
This work happens in the physical world: engraved areas, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Clean and polish engraved areas.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cleaning and polishing an engraved surface is done by hand on the piece.
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.
Engraving and printing patterns, designs, etchings
This work happens in the physical world: patterns, designs, etchings, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Supplemental
Source: “Engrave and print patterns, designs, etchings, trademarks, or lettering onto flat or curved surfaces of a wide variety of metal, glass, plastic, or paper items, using hand tools or hand-held power tools.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cutting patterns into metal, glass or plastic with hand tools is physical craft 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.
Preparing workpieces for etching or engraving
This work happens in the physical world: workpieces, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Supplemental
Source: “Prepare workpieces for etching or engraving by cutting, sanding, cleaning, polishing, or treating them with wax, acid resist, lime, etching powder, or light-sensitive enamel.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cutting, sanding and coating workpieces with wax or resist is entirely hands-on preparation.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Removing completed workpieces and placing them in trays
This work happens in the physical world: completed workpieces, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Remove completed workpieces and place them in trays.” (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: Lifting finished pieces off the machine into trays is physical handling.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

Show the other 16 tasks

Determining machine settings and moving bars or levers to reproduce designs on rollers or plates
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: machine settings, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Determine machine settings, and move bars or levers to reproduce designs on rollers or plates.” (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: Choosing the settings is knowledge software can supply, but moving the bars and levers needs a person at the machine.
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.
Setting reduction scales to attain specified sizes of reproduction on workpieces
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: reduction scales, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Set reduction scales to attain specified sizes of reproduction on workpieces, and set pantograph controls for required heights, depths, and widths of cuts.” (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: Working out the reduction ratio is arithmetic, but setting the pantograph controls is hands-on machine 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.
Sketching trace or scribe layout lines and designs on workpieces, plates, dies or rollers, using compasses, scribers, gravers or pencils
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: trace, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Sketch, trace, or scribe layout lines and designs on workpieces, plates, dies, or rollers, using compasses, scribers, gravers, or pencils.” (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: Software can produce the design, but scribing lines onto the actual workpiece is done by hand.
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.
Adjusting depths and sizes of cuts by adjusting heights of worktables
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: depths, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Adjust depths and sizes of cuts by adjusting heights of worktables, or by adjusting machine-arm gauges.” (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: Raising worktables and turning machine gauges is done with hands on the machine.
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.
Positioning and clamping workpieces, plates or rollers in holding fixtures
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: workpieces, plates or rollers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Position and clamp workpieces, plates, or rollers in holding fixtures.” (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: Clamping a workpiece into a fixture is purely physical handling.
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.
Starting machines and lower cutting tools to beginning points on patterns
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: machines, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Start machines and lower cutting tools to beginning points on patterns.” (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: Starting the machine and lowering the tool to the start point is done at the controls.
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.
Preparing etching chemicals
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: chemicals, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Supplemental
Source: “Prepare etching chemicals according to formulas, diluting acid with water to obtain solutions of specified concentration.” (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: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Diluting and mixing acids is physical laboratory work at the bench.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Sandblasting exposed areas of glass to cut designs in surfaces
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: exposed areas of glass, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Sandblast exposed areas of glass to cut designs in surfaces, using spray guns.” (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: Sandblasting glass with a spray gun is physical work in a booth.
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.
Neutralizing workpieces to remove acid
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: workpieces, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Neutralize workpieces to remove acid, wax, or enamel, using water, solvents, brushes, or specialized machines.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Washing and neutralizing acid or wax off workpieces is physical cleaning 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.
Inserting cutting tools or bits into machines and securing them with wrenches
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: tools, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Insert cutting tools or bits into machines and secure them with wrenches.” (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: Fitting cutting bits and tightening them with a wrench is hands-on 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.
Transferring image to workpiece, using contact printer, pantograph stylus, silkscreen printing device or stamping pad
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: image, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Transfer image to workpiece, using contact printer, pantograph stylus, silkscreen printing device, or stamp pad.” (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: Pressing or printing an image onto a workpiece is done by hand at the machine.
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.
Guiding stylus over template, causing cutting tool to duplicate design or letters on workpiece
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: stylus over template, causing cutting tool, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Guide stylus over template, causing cutting tool to duplicate design or letters on workpiece.” (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: Guiding a stylus over a template is hand-controlled machine work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Removing wax or tape from etched glassware by using a stylus or knife
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: wax, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Remove wax or tape from etched glassware by using a stylus or knife, or by immersing ware in hot water.” (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: Scraping wax off glassware or dipping it in hot water is done by hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Filling etched characters with opaque paste to improve readability
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: etched characters, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Fill etched characters with opaque paste to improve readability.” (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: Rubbing paste into etched characters is done by hand on the piece.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Brushing or wiping acid over engraving to darken or highlight inscriptions
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: acid, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Brush or wipe acid over engraving to darken or highlight inscriptions.” (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: Brushing acid over an engraving to darken it is physical finishing work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Exposing workpieces to acid to develop etch patterns
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: workpieces, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Expose workpieces to acid to develop etch patterns such as designs, lettering, or figures.” (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: Putting workpieces into acid baths is physical handling of materials.
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: $43,310a 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: 7,750in 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: computer software in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: using computer software to design patterns for engraving. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where etched work gets 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: inspecting etched work for depth of etching is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 4% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 0% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 96% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 26 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. Using computer software to design patterns for engraving 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 computer software, 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 etched work is 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 inspecting etched work for depth of etching. 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 etchers and engravers (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was cutting, punching, and press machine setters, operators, and tenders, metal and plastic: only about 4% of its durable work is work you already do. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 10/100 here, with only 4% of the task list in the top band, and “inspect etched work for depth of etching, uniformity, and defects, using calibrated…” 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.

Cutting, Punching, and Press Machine Setters, Operators, and Tenders, Metal and Plastic
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already clean and polish engraved areas, and their equivalent is to clean work area. Across both published task lists that is about 4% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 4% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Drilling and Boring Machine Tool Setters, Operators, and Tenders, Metal and Plastic
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already position and clamp workpieces, plates, or rollers in holding fixtures, and their equivalent is to position and secure workpieces on tables, using bolts, jigs, clamps, shims, or other…. 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.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Grinding and Polishing Workers, Hand
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already remove completed workpieces and place them in trays, and their equivalent is to remove completed workpieces from equipment or work tables, using hand tools, and place…. 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.
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: 4% of its task weight, across 26 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 inspecting etched work for depth of etching 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 Assemblers (electrical and electronic products) 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 Assemblers (electrical and electronic products). 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:
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

Why there is no community here

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

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

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for etchers / engravers 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 etchers / engravers 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 etchers / engravers 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 etchers / engravers 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 Etchers and Engravers?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 26 official task statements scored for Etchers and Engravers (United States, SOC 51-9194), 4% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 10 out of 100 (range 8–16, 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 “Etchers and Engravers” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Use computer software to design patterns for engraving” (75/100, high); “Measure and compute dimensions of lettering, designs, or patterns to be engraved” (38/100, low); “Examine sketches, diagrams, samples, blueprints, or photographs to decide how designs are to be etched, cut, or engraved onto workpieces” (38/100, low). 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 “Etchers and Engravers” stay human?: About 96% 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: “Expose workpieces to acid to develop etch patterns such as designs, lettering, or figures” (0/100, minimal); “Brush or wipe acid over engraving to darken or highlight inscriptions” (0/100, minimal); “Fill etched characters with opaque paste to improve readability” (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 “Etchers and Engravers” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 4% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 96% 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 Etchers and Engravers 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 26 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.
1 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.