US dataswitch to UK
Railroad Conductors and Yardmasters
signaling engineers to begin train runs, operating controls to activate track switches and traffic signals and keeping records of the contents and destination of each train car. If that's your week, this page is about your job.
The honest answer
AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: signaling engineers to begin train runs is work software can't reach.
What shifts is confirming routes and destination information for freight cars: the overhead at the edges, not the middle you trained for.
Your week, as this page understands it
Coordinate activities of switch-engine crew within railroad yard, industrial plant, or similar location. Conductors coordinate activities of train crew on passenger or freight trains. Yardmasters review train schedules and switching orders and coordinate activities of workers engaged in railroad traffic operations, such as the makeup or breakup of trains and yard switching. The job title says “railroad conductors” or “yardmasters”: officially one job, two names. The real job is the part underneath: signaling engineers to begin train runs. 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 railroad conductors and yardmasters is not one task. It is 20 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is signaling engineers to begin train runs, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 13%
- changing shape
- 0%
- staying human
- 87%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 24 out of 100 (19–29 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 20 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 railroad conductors and yardmasters 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.
- One task scored differently between repeat runs, so its range on this page is wider. We would rather show the wobble than hide it.
- 3 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
3 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.
Confirming routes and destination information for freight cars
This is reading one thing and writing another: routes in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Confirm routes and destination information for freight cars.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (77–85 allowing for uncertainty): very 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: Confirming a freight car's route and destination is a straightforward records check against the shipping system.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reviewing schedules, switching orders, way bills and shipping records to obtain cargo loading and unloading information and to plan work
This is reading one thing and writing another: schedules, switching orders, way bills and shipping records in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Review schedules, switching orders, way bills, and shipping records to obtain cargo loading and unloading information and to plan work.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (77–85 allowing for uncertainty): very 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: Reading switching orders, waybills and schedules to plan the work is document handling on data already in systems.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Recording departure and arrival times
This is reading one thing and writing another: departure in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Record departure and arrival times, messages, tickets and revenue collected, and passenger accommodations and destinations.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 69 out of 100 (65–73 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: Times, tickets, revenue and accommodation details are structured records that ticketing systems already capture.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
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
17 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.
Signaling engineers to begin train runs
This work happens in the physical world: engineers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Signal engineers to begin train runs, stop trains, or change speed, using telecommunications equipment or hand signals.” (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: Signalling an engineer, by radio or hand, is done from trackside or the train at that moment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Receiving information regarding train or rail problems from dispatchers or from electronic monitoring devices
This work happens in the physical world: information regarding train, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Receive information regarding train or rail problems from dispatchers or from electronic monitoring devices.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (21–35 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: Problem reports arrive as data already, though acting on them means being with the train.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Conferring with engineers regarding train routes
This work happens in the physical world: engineers regarding train routes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Confer with engineers regarding train routes, timetables, and cargoes, and to discuss alternative routes when there are rail defects or obstructions.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (14–22 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; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Route discussions draw on documented rules, but they happen between crew members working the train.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Receiving instructions from dispatchers regarding trains' routes
This work happens in the physical world: instructions, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Receive instructions from dispatchers regarding trains' routes, timetables, and cargoes.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (21–35 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: Dispatcher instructions are structured information, but they are received and used by crew on the train.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Directing engineers to move cars to fit planned train configurations
This work happens in the physical world: engineers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Direct engineers to move cars to fit planned train configurations, combining or separating cars to make up or break up trains.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (2–16 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; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Software can build the switch list, but directing the moves takes place in the yard as cars are handled.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Arranging for the removal of defective cars from trains at stations or stops
This work happens in the physical world: the removal of defective cars, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Arrange for the removal of defective cars from trains at stations or stops.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Arranging a bad-order car's removal is coordination, but identifying and setting it out happens at the train.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Keeping records of the contents and destination of each train car
This work happens in the physical world: records of the contents, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Keep records of the contents and destination of each train car, and make sure that cars are added or removed at proper points on routes.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 33 out of 100 (29–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high 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: Car contents and destinations are records software handles well, but confirming cars are set out correctly happens trackside.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Show the other 10 tasks
Documenting and preparing reports of accidents
staying humanThe ratings behind this row put reports of accidents well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Document and prepare reports of accidents, unscheduled stops, or delays.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 33 out of 100 (23–43 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Software can draft an incident or delay report, but the account of what happened comes from the driver.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Observing yard traffic to determine tracks available to accommodate inbound and outbound traffic
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: yard traffic, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Observe yard traffic to determine tracks available to accommodate inbound and outbound traffic.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Yard sensors give useful data, but judging available tracks still largely means watching the yard from the tower.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Verifying accuracy of timekeeping instruments with engineers to ensure trains depart on time
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: accuracy of timekeeping instruments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Verify accuracy of timekeeping instruments with engineers to ensure trains depart on time.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 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: Time checks are trivial to automate, but they are done with the engineer at the train before departure.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Operating controls to activate track switches and traffic signals
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: controls, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Operate controls to activate track switches and traffic signals.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 11 out of 100 (4–18 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; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Some switching is done from a control panel, but lining switches in the yard is hands-on work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Inspecting freight cars for compliance with sealing procedures
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: freight cars, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Inspect freight cars for compliance with sealing procedures, and record car numbers and seal numbers.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (5–13 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: Checking seals means walking the cars, even though the numbers recorded afterwards are simple data.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Directing and instructing workers engaged in yard activities
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: workers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Direct and instruct workers engaged in yard activities, such as switching tracks, coupling and uncoupling cars, and routing inbound and outbound traffic.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (1–9 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: Directing yard crews through switching moves means being in the yard watching what is happening.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Instructing workers to set warning signals in front and at rear of trains during emergency stops
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: workers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Instruct workers to set warning signals in front and at rear of trains during emergency stops.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (1–9 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: Placing warning signals in an emergency is urgent physical work along the track.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Supervising workers in the inspection and maintenance of mechanical equipment to ensure efficient and safe train operation
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: workers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Supervise workers in the inspection and maintenance of mechanical equipment to ensure efficient and safe train operation.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (1–9 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: Supervising inspection and maintenance means being where the equipment is being worked on.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Supervising and coordinating crew activities to transport freight and passengers and to provide boarding
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: crew activities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Supervise and coordinate crew activities to transport freight and passengers and to provide boarding, porter, maid, and meal services to passengers.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–8 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 value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Coordinating crews serving passengers happens on the moving train alongside the people doing it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Inspecting each car periodically during runs
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: each car periodically during runs, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Inspect each car periodically during runs.” (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: Inspecting each car during a run means physically walking the train.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- $78,000a 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
- 46,440in 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: schedules, switching orders, way bills and shipping records in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: confirming routes and destination information for freight cars and reviewing schedules, switching orders. What it cannot do is be answerable: engineers need a named person the rules will accept, and software cannot be that person. 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: signaling engineers to begin train runs is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.
So, given all that: 13% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 0% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 87% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 20 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. Confirming routes and destination information for freight cars 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 schedules, switching orders, way bills and shipping records, 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 information regarding train 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 signaling engineers to begin train runs. 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 railroad conductors and yardmasters (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was railroad brake, signal, and switch operators and locomotive firers: only about 6% of its durable work is work you already do and it pays 11.7% less. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 24/100 here, with only 13% of the task list in the top band, and “signal engineers to begin train runs, stop trains, or change speed, using…” 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.
Railroad Brake, Signal, and Switch Operators and Locomotive Firers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already instruct workers to set warning signals in front and at rear of trains…, and their equivalent is to set flares, flags, lanterns, or torpedoes in front and at rear of trains…. Across both published task lists that is about 6% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 6% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $68,840 against your $78,000, 11.7% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Elevator and Escalator Installers and Repairers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already operate controls to activate track switches and traffic signals, and their equivalent is to locate malfunctions in brakes, motors, switches, and signal and control systems, using test…. Across both published task lists that is about 2% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 2% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Rail Yard Engineers, Dinkey Operators, and Hostlers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already record departure and arrival times, messages, tickets and revenue collected, and passenger accommodations…, and their equivalent is to report arrival and departure times, train delays, work order completion, and time on…. Across both published task lists that is about 1% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 1% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $60,600 against your $78,000, 22.3% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice. And it is a narrow door: about 3,920 of those jobs against 46,440 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 8% as many seats.
What I’d stop worrying about
A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.
The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 13% of its task weight, across 20 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 signaling engineers to begin train runs 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 Rail transport operatives 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 Rail transport operatives. Pay and employment stay on this page’s own group; the task list and the scores do not cross over.
Your route through this
Where to go next, and what it costs
Free, and complete
The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
Free
No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it
Nothing Collab365 runs is built for railroad conductors / yardmasters, 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 13% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.
7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.
The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for railroad conductors / yardmasters. 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 railroad conductors / yardmasters 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 Railroad Conductors and Yardmasters?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 20 official task statements scored for Railroad Conductors and Yardmasters (United States, SOC 53-4031), 13% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 24 out of 100 (range 19–29, band: low). 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 “Railroad Conductors and Yardmasters” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Review schedules, switching orders, way bills, and shipping records to obtain cargo loading and unloading information and to plan work” (81/100, very high); “Confirm routes and destination information for freight cars” (81/100, very high); “Record departure and arrival times, messages, tickets and revenue collected, and passenger accommodations and destinations” (69/100, high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
- Which tasks in “Railroad Conductors and Yardmasters” stay human?
- About 87% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Inspect each car periodically during runs” (0/100, minimal); “Signal engineers to begin train runs, stop trains, or change speed, using telecommunications equipment or hand signals” (0/100, minimal); “Supervise and coordinate crew activities to transport freight and passengers and to provide boarding, porter, maid, and meal services to passengers” (4/100, 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 “Railroad Conductors and Yardmasters” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 13% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 87% 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 Railroad Conductors and Yardmasters 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 20 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.
Where these numbers come from
About the data on this page
- One task scored differently between repeat runs, so its range on this page is wider. We would rather show the wobble than hide it.
- The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
- 3 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.
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.