US dataswitch to UK

Lifeguards, Ski Patrol, and Other Recreational Protective Service Workers

patrolling or monitoring recreational areas, maintaining quality of pool water by testing chemical levels and completing and maintaining records of weather and beach conditions. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: rescuing distressed persons, using rescue techniques and equipment 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: 8%
changing shape: 0%
staying human: 92%

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

Whole-job exposure score 12 out of 100 (10–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, across 15 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 lifeguards, ski patrol, and other recreational protective service workers is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-04. Read the full method.

What shifts is completing and maintaining records of weather and beach conditions: the paper around the work, not the work.

Your week, as this page understands it

Monitor recreational areas, such as pools, beaches, or ski slopes, to provide assistance and protection to participants. The job title says “lifeguards”, “ski patrol” or “other recreational protective service workers”: officially one job, several names. The real job is the part underneath: rescuing distressed persons, using rescue techniques and equipment. 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 lifeguards, ski patrol, and other recreational protective service workers is not one task. It is 15 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is rescuing distressed persons, using rescue techniques and equipment, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 8%
changing shape: 0%
staying human: 92%

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 2026-08-04. Read the full method.

Your job, task by task

These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.

Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Shifting to AI

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.

Completing and maintaining records of weather and beach conditions
This is reading one thing and writing another: records of weather in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Complete and maintain records of weather and beach conditions, emergency medical treatments performed, and other relevant incident information.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 61 out of 100 (57–65 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: Condition logs and incident records are routine written records that software compiles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

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

14 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.

Rescuing distressed persons, using rescue techniques and equipment
This work happens in the physical world: distressed persons, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Rescue distressed persons, using rescue techniques and equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Pulling someone out of danger is physical rescue 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 1/4 · how much data exists 1/4.
Patrolling or monitoring recreational areas
This work happens in the physical world: recreational areas, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Patrol or monitor recreational areas, such as trails, slopes, or swimming areas, on foot, in vehicles, or from towers.” (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: Patrolling slopes, trails or water means physically being there watching.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Contacting emergency medical personnel in case of serious injury
This work happens in the physical world: emergency medical personnel, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Contact emergency medical personnel in case of serious injury.” (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; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: The call itself is simple and can be triggered automatically, but noticing the injury needs someone on the spot.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Examining injured persons and administering first aid or cardiopulmonary resuscitation
This work happens in the physical world: injured persons, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Examine injured persons and administer first aid or cardiopulmonary resuscitation, if necessary, using training and medical supplies and equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Checking an injured person and giving first aid needs trained hands on them.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Warning recreational participants of inclement weather
This work happens in the physical world: recreational participants of inclement weather, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Warn recreational participants of inclement weather, unsafe areas, or illegal conduct.” (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; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Weather and hazard warnings can be generated and broadcast automatically, though spotting unsafe behavior needs someone watching.
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 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Instructing participants in skiing, swimming or other recreational activities and providing safety precaution information
This work happens in the physical world: participants, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Instruct participants in skiing, swimming, or other recreational activities and provide safety precaution information.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (3–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Teaching swimming or skiing means demonstrating and correcting people physically in the water or on the snow.
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 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Inspecting recreational equipment, such as rope tows, T-bars, J-bars or chair lifts
This work happens in the physical world: recreational equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Inspect recreational equipment, such as rope tows, T-bars, J-bars, or chair lifts, for safety hazards and damage or wear.” (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: Checking lifts and tows for wear means physically examining the equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Inspecting recreational facilities for cleanliness
This work happens in the physical world: recreational facilities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Inspect recreational facilities for cleanliness.” (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: Checking whether facilities are clean means walking through and looking.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Maintaining quality of pool water by testing chemical levels
This work happens in the physical world: quality of pool water, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Maintain quality of pool water by testing chemical levels.” (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: Testing and correcting pool chemistry means handling samples and chemicals poolside.
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 3/4.

Show the other 5 tasks

Providing assistance with staff selection
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles assistance and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Provide assistance with staff selection, training, and supervision.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Hiring paperwork and training material can be drafted automatically, but supervising staff depends on being with them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Observing activities in assigned areas
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: activities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Observe activities in assigned areas, using binoculars, to detect hazards, disturbances, or safety infractions.” (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: Watching an area through binoculars for trouble means being posted there.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · 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.
Providing assistance in the safe use of equipment
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: assistance, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Provide assistance in the safe use of equipment, such as ski lifts.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Helping people use a ski lift safely means standing beside it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Operating underwater recovery units
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: underwater recovery units, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Operate underwater recovery units.” (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 underwater recovery equipment is physical work in the water.
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.
Participating in recreational demonstrations to entertain resort guests
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: recreational demonstrations, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 2 · Supplemental
Source: “Participate in recreational demonstrations to entertain resort guests.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Taking part in a live demonstration for guests means being there in person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: $33,580a 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: 157,550in 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: records of weather in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: completing and maintaining records of weather and beach conditions. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where distressed persons 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: rescuing distressed persons, using rescue techniques and equipment is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 8% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 0% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 92% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 15 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. Completing and maintaining records of weather and beach conditions 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 records of weather, 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 distressed persons 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 rescuing distressed persons, using rescue techniques and equipment. 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 lifeguards, ski patrol, and other recreational protective service workers (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was recreation workers: only about 10% of its durable work is work you already do. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 12/100 here, with only 8% of the task list in the top band, and “rescue distressed persons, using rescue techniques and equipment” 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.

Recreation Workers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already inspect recreational facilities for cleanliness, and their equivalent is to manage the daily operations of recreational facilities. Across both published task lists that is about 10% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 10% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Emergency Medical Technicians
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already examine injured persons and administer first aid or cardiopulmonary resuscitation, if necessary, using…, and their equivalent is to administer first aid treatment or life support care to sick or injured persons…. Across both published task lists that is about 7% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 7% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
First-Line Supervisors of Firefighting and Prevention Workers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already rescue distressed persons, using rescue techniques and equipment, and their equivalent is to provide emergency medical services as required, and perform light to heavy rescue functions…. 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. The pay gap is the market pricing a barrier: $93,530 against your $33,580 is 2.79× (OEWS May 2025 (both)), and you would be crossing it holding about 4% of their durable work. A gap that size with an overlap that small is a wish, not a route.
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: 8% of its task weight, across 15 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 rescuing distressed persons, using rescue techniques and equipment 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 Police community support officers 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 Police community support officers. 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

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

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for lifeguards / ski patrol / other recreational protective service workers, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 8% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.

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 lifeguards / ski patrol / other recreational protective service workers. 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 lifeguards / ski patrol / other recreational protective service workers 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 lifeguards / ski patrol / other recreational protective service workers 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 lifeguards / ski patrol / other recreational protective service workers 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 lifeguards / ski patrol / other recreational protective service workers 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 Lifeguards, Ski Patrol, and Other Recreational Protective Service Workers?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 15 official task statements scored for Lifeguards, Ski Patrol, and Other Recreational Protective Service Workers (United States, SOC 33-9092), 8% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 12 out of 100 (range 10–17, 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 “Lifeguards, Ski Patrol, and Other Recreational Protective Service Workers” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Complete and maintain records of weather and beach conditions, emergency medical treatments performed, and other relevant incident information” (61/100, high); “Contact emergency medical personnel in case of serious injury” (32/100, low); “Warn recreational participants of inclement weather, unsafe areas, or illegal conduct” (32/100, 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 “Lifeguards, Ski Patrol, and Other Recreational Protective Service Workers” stay human?: About 92% 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: “Maintain quality of pool water by testing chemical levels” (0/100, minimal); “Participate in recreational demonstrations to entertain resort guests” (0/100, minimal); “Operate underwater recovery units” (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 “Lifeguards, Ski Patrol, and Other Recreational Protective Service Workers” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 8% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 92% 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 Lifeguards, Ski Patrol, and Other Recreational Protective Service Workers 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 15 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

Where these numbers come from

Worth knowing about these figures

The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Task statements: onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights: onet-db (im-rt)
Scores: Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-04.
Pay and employment: bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))

Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.

The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.

The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.

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.