Futureproof

US dataswitch to UK

Slaughterers and Meat Packers

removing bones, slitting open, eviscerate and trimming carcasses of slaughtered animals and stunning animals prior to slaughtering. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: removing bones and cutting meat into standard cuts in preparation for marketing is work software can't reach.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

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

Perform nonroutine or precision functions involving the preparation of large portions of meat. Work may include specialized slaughtering tasks, cutting standard or premium cuts of meat for marketing, making sausage, or wrapping meats. Work typically occurs in slaughtering, meat packing, or wholesale establishments. The job title says “slaughterers” or “meat packers”: officially one job, two names. The real job is the part underneath: removing bones and cutting meat into standard cuts in preparation for marketing. 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 slaughterers and meat packers is not one task. It is 14 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is removing bones and cutting meat into standard cuts in preparation for marketing, 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 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, across 14 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 slaughterers and meat packers 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.

Shifting to AI

0 tasks

Tasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.

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 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.

  • Removing bones and cutting meat into standard cuts in preparation for marketing

    This work happens in the physical world: bones, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Supplemental
    Source:Remove bones, and cut meat into standard cuts in preparation for marketing.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Boning and cutting a carcass into retail cuts is skilled knife work 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.

  • Slitting open, eviscerate and trimming carcasses of slaughtered animals

    This work happens in the physical world: open, eviscerate and trimming carcasses of slaughtered animals, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source:Slit open, eviscerate, and trim carcasses of slaughtered animals.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Opening and trimming carcasses is done with knives, 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, trimming, skin, sort and washing viscera of slaughtered animals to separate edible portions from offal

    This work happens in the physical world: skin, sort and washing viscera of slaughtered animals, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source:Cut, trim, skin, sort, and wash viscera of slaughtered animals to separate edible portions from offal.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Separating and washing edible parts by hand is physical work at the line.

    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.

  • Trimming head meat and sever or removing parts of animals' heads or skulls

    This work happens in the physical world: head meat, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source:Trim head meat, and sever or remove parts of animals' heads or skulls.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Trimming and removing head parts is hands-on cutting 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 0/4.

  • Skinning sections of animals or whole animals

    This work happens in the physical world: sections of animals, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source:Skin sections of animals or whole animals.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Skinning is hand work on the animal.

    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.

  • Sawing split or scribe carcasses into smaller portions to facilitate handling

    This work happens in the physical world: split, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source:Saw, split, or scribe carcasses into smaller portions to facilitate handling.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Sawing and splitting carcasses is physical work with a saw.

    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.

  • Shaving or singing and defeather carcasses

    This work happens in the physical world: defeather carcasses, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source:Shave or singe and defeather carcasses, and wash them in preparation for further processing or packaging.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Removing hair or feathers and washing carcasses is physical work on the line.

    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.

  • Shackling hind legs of animals to raise them for slaughtering or skinning

    This work happens in the physical world: hind legs of animals, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Supplemental
    Source:Shackle hind legs of animals to raise them for slaughtering or skinning.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Shackling animals is heavy physical handling.

    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 0/4.

  • Tending assembly lines, performing a few of the many cuts needed to process a carcass

    This work happens in the physical world: lines, performing a few of the many cuts, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Supplemental
    Source:Tend assembly lines, performing a few of the many cuts needed to process a carcass.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Working a station on the processing line means standing there making the cuts.

    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.

  • Severing jugular veins to drain blood and facilitating slaughtering

    This work happens in the physical world: jugular veins, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 5 · Supplemental
    Source:Sever jugular veins to drain blood and facilitate slaughtering.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (07 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.

    The rating behind it: Slaughtering acts must be carried out by hand by a certificated person.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 0/4.

Show the other 4 tasks
  • Trimming, cleaning or cure animal hides

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: cure animal hides, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source:Trim, clean, or cure animal hides.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Trimming and curing hides is done by hand with tools.

    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.

  • Grinding meat into hamburger and into trimmings used to prepare sausages, luncheon meats and other meat products

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: meat, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source:Grind meat into hamburger, and into trimmings used to prepare sausages, luncheon meats, and other meat products.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Running meat through a grinder means loading and operating the machine 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.

  • Stunning animals prior to slaughtering

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: animals prior, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source:Stun animals prior to slaughtering.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (07 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.

    The rating behind it: Stunning must be done in person by someone holding a certificate of competence.

    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 0/4 · how much data exists 1/4.

  • Wrapping dressed carcasses or meat cuts

    staying human

    This work happens in the physical world: dressed carcasses, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.

    importance 4 · Supplemental
    Source:Wrap dressed carcasses or meat cuts.” (O*NET task statement)
    How this row was scored

    Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (04 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.

    Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.

    The rating behind it: Wrapping carcasses and cuts is hand 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
$40,130a 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
69,950in 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 bones, which happens with people and things rather than on a screen. The rows above are the evidence rather than the reassurance: removing bones and slitting open, eviscerate and trimming carcasses of slaughtered animals. 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: removing bones and cutting meat into standard cuts in preparation for marketing 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 14 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 open, eviscerate and trimming carcasses of slaughtered animals 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 removing bones and cutting meat into standard cuts in preparation for marketing. 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 slaughterers and meat packers (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was meat, poultry, and fish cutters and trimmers: only about 13% of its durable work is work you already do. 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 “remove bones, and cut meat into standard cuts in preparation for marketing” 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.

  • Meat, Poultry, and Fish Cutters and Trimmers

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already grind meat into hamburger, and into trimmings used to prepare sausages, luncheon meats…, and their equivalent is to produce hamburger meat and meat trimmings. Across both published task lists that is about 13% of the durable work in that job.

    Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 13% 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 →

  • Butchers and Meat Cutters

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already remove bones, and cut meat into standard cuts in preparation for marketing, and their equivalent is to prepare special cuts of meat ordered by customers. Across both published task lists that is about 11% of the durable work in that job.

    Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 11% 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 →

  • Animal Control Workers

    Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the overall shape of the two task lists, but nothing in your day matched a specific piece of theirs closely enough to name.

    Why I am not recommending it: The two task lists look alike from a distance and share almost nothing close up: no single piece of their work matched a piece of yours. That is a resemblance, not a route. And it is a narrow door: about 12,070 of those jobs against 69,950 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 17% as many seats.

    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: 0% of its task weight, across 14 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 removing bones and cutting meat into standard cuts in preparation for marketing 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 Butchers is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.

Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match

The other groups this work is counted across:

In UK official statistics this job is counted as Butchers and Fishmongers and poultry dressers. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.

Your route through this

Where to go next, and what it costs

Free, and complete

The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.

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 slaughterers / meat packers 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 slaughterers / meat packers 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 slaughterers / meat packers existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for slaughterers / meat packers 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 Slaughterers and Meat Packers?
Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 14 official task statements scored for Slaughterers and Meat Packers (United States, SOC 51-3023), 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 “Slaughterers and Meat Packers” can AI already do?
The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Remove bones, and cut meat into standard cuts in preparation for marketing” (0/100, minimal); “Cut, trim, skin, sort, and wash viscera of slaughtered animals to separate edible portions from offal” (0/100, minimal); “Slit open, eviscerate, and trim carcasses of slaughtered animals” (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 “Slaughterers and Meat Packers” 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: “Wrap dressed carcasses or meat cuts” (0/100, minimal); “Stun animals prior to slaughtering” (0/100, minimal); “Grind meat into hamburger, and into trimmings used to prepare sausages, luncheon meats, and other meat products” (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 “Slaughterers and Meat Packers” 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 Slaughterers and Meat Packers 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 14 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

Where these numbers come from

About the data on this page

  • 2 tasks scored differently between repeat runs, so their range on this page is wider. We would rather show the wobble than hide it.
  • The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
  • 5 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
  • Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
Task statements
onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights
onet-db (im-rt)
Scores
Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
Pay and employment
bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))

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

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

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

How we score a jobDownload this releaseLook 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}
}

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.