US dataswitch to UK
Foundry Mold and Coremakers
cleaning and smoothing molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface imperfections, tending machines that bond cope and drag together to form completed shell molds and sprinkling or spraying parting agents onto patterns and mold sections to facilitate removal of patterns from molds. If that's your week, this page is about your job.
The honest answer
AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: cleaning and smoothing molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface imperfections is work software can't reach.
What shifts is the routine end of the work: the overhead at the edges, not the middle you trained for.
Your week, as this page understands it
Make or form wax or sand cores or molds used in the production of metal castings in foundries. The job title says “foundry mold” or “coremakers”: officially one job, two names. The real job is the part underneath: cleaning and smoothing molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface imperfections. 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 foundry mold and coremakers is not one task. It is 13 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is cleaning and smoothing molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface imperfections, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 0%
- changing shape
- 0%
- staying human
- 100%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, across 13 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 foundry mold and coremakers is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.
How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.
Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.
Your job, task by task
These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.
- 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
0 tasksTasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.
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.
Changing shape
0 tasksTasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.
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
13 tasksTasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.
Cleaning and smoothing molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface imperfections
This work happens in the physical world: molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Clean and smooth molds, cores, and core boxes, and repair surface imperfections.” (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 repairing molds and core boxes is hands-on work on the tooling.
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.
Moving and positioning workpieces, such as mold sections, patterns and bottom boards, using cranes or signal others to move workpieces
This work happens in the physical world: workpieces, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Move and position workpieces, such as mold sections, patterns, and bottom boards, using cranes, or signal others to move workpieces.” (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: Moving heavy mold sections with cranes, or signaling others to, is physical work on the floor.
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.
Sifting and packing sand into mold sections
This work happens in the physical world: sand, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Sift and pack sand into mold sections, core boxes, and pattern contours, using hand or pneumatic ramming 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: Packing sand into molds with ramming tools is physical work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Sprinkling or spraying parting agents onto patterns and mold sections to facilitate removal of patterns from molds
This work happens in the physical world: agents, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Sprinkle or spray parting agents onto patterns and mold sections to facilitate removal of patterns from molds.” (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: Spraying parting agent onto patterns is 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 1/4.
Positioning patterns inside mold sections
This work happens in the physical world: patterns inside mold sections, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Position patterns inside mold sections, and clamp sections together.” (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: Placing patterns and clamping mold sections together 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 1/4.
Cutting spouts, runner holes and sprue holes into molds
This work happens in the physical world: spouts, runner holes and sprue holes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Cut spouts, runner holes, and sprue holes into molds.” (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 sprue and runner holes into a mold 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 1/4.
Positioning cores into lower sections of molds
This work happens in the physical world: cores, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Position cores into lower sections of molds, and reassemble molds for pouring.” (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 cores and reassembling molds 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.
Lifting upper mold sections from lower sections
This work happens in the physical world: upper mold sections, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Lift upper mold sections from lower sections, and remove molded 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: Lifting mold sections apart and drawing patterns out is physical work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Forming and assembling slab cores around patterns
This work happens in the physical world: slab cores around patterns, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Form and assemble slab cores around patterns, and position wire in mold sections to reinforce molds, using hand tools and glue.” (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 slab cores and setting reinforcing wire 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 1/4.
Operating ovens or furnaces to bake cores
This work happens in the physical world: ovens, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Operate ovens or furnaces to bake cores or to melt, skim, and flux metal.” (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: Operating ovens and furnaces to bake cores or melt metal is hands-on plant 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.
Show the other 3 tasks
Tending machines that bond cope and drag together to form completed shell molds
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: machines, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · SupplementalSource: “Tend machines that bond cope and drag together to form completed shell molds.” (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: Tending a shell-mold bonding machine means being 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 1/4.
Pouring molten metal into molds
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: molten metal, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Pour molten metal into molds, manually or with crane ladles.” (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: Pouring molten metal is physical work that has to happen at the mold.
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.
Rotating sweep boards around spindles to make symmetrical molds for convex impressions
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: sweep boards around spindles, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Rotate sweep boards around spindles to make symmetrical molds for convex impressions.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Sweeping a board around a spindle to shape a mold is manual 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.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- $48,110a 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
- 12,790in 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. Almost none of this job is reading one thing and writing another (the shape today's tools are built for), because the work turns on molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface, which happens with people and things rather than on a screen. The rows above are the evidence rather than the reassurance: cleaning and smoothing molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface imperfections and moving and positioning workpieces. The parts that are changing are the paperwork and the tools around the job, not the middle of it, which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.
Your move
Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend
Start with what does not change: cleaning and smoothing molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface imperfections is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.
So, given all that: 0% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 0% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 100% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 13 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. The routine end of the work 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 the routine work, 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 molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface 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 cleaning and smoothing molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface imperfections. 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 foundry mold and coremakers (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was patternmakers, metal and plastic: only about 3% of its durable work is work you already do and there are far fewer of those jobs than of yours. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 0/100 here, with only 0% of the task list in the top band, and “clean and smooth molds, cores, and core boxes, and repair surface imperfections” 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.
Patternmakers, Metal and Plastic
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already form and assemble slab cores around patterns, and position wire in mold sections…, and their equivalent is to assemble pattern sections, using hand tools, bolts, screws, rivets, glue, or welding equipment. 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. And it is a narrow door: about 1,470 of those jobs against 12,790 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 11% as many seats.
Metal-Refining Furnace Operators and Tenders
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already pour molten metal into molds, manually or with crane ladles, and their equivalent is to drain, transfer, or remove molten metal from furnaces, and place it into molds…. 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.
Pourers and Casters, Metal
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already pour molten metal into molds, manually or with crane ladles, and their equivalent is to pour and regulate the flow of molten metal into molds and forms to…. 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.
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: 0% of its task weight, across 13 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The headlines about your trade disappearing
They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like cleaning and smoothing molds, cores and core boxes and repairing surface imperfections 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 nearest United Kingdom equivalent is Metal plate workers, smiths, moulders and related occupations. It is a close match rather than an identical one: the two countries draw the boundary of the job in slightly different places.
Switch to the United Kingdom page →close match
Your route through this
Where to go next, and what it costs
Free, and complete
The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
Free
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 foundry mold / coremakers launches. Nothing else.
That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.
We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.
No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.
Questions people ask about this job
- Will AI replace Foundry Mold and Coremakers?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 13 official task statements scored for Foundry Mold and Coremakers (United States, SOC 51-4071), 0% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 0 out of 100 (range 0–4, 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 “Foundry Mold and Coremakers” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Clean and smooth molds, cores, and core boxes, and repair surface imperfections” (0/100, minimal); “Move and position workpieces, such as mold sections, patterns, and bottom boards, using cranes, or signal others to move workpieces” (0/100, minimal); “Sprinkle or spray parting agents onto patterns and mold sections to facilitate removal of patterns from molds” (0/100, minimal). 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 “Foundry Mold and Coremakers” stay human?
- About 100% 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: “Operate ovens or furnaces to bake cores or to melt, skim, and flux metal” (0/100, minimal); “Rotate sweep boards around spindles to make symmetrical molds for convex impressions” (0/100, minimal); “Pour molten metal into molds, manually or with crane ladles” (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 “Foundry Mold and Coremakers” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 0% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 100% 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 Foundry Mold and Coremakers 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 13 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
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
- Task statements
- onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
- Task weights
- onet-db (im-rt)
- Scores
- Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
- Pay and employment
- bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))
Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.
The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.
The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.
Using these figures?
Cite this
Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.
Plain text
Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).
BibTeX
@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
title = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
author = {{Collab365}},
year = {2026},
url = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
note = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published . Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.