How exposed this work is to automation, shown as ranges with the reasoning and sources.
The short version: this role is moderately exposed to automation, and a near-term shift looks unlikely.
It is a sourced range, not a verdict, and the detail is below.
Built on O*NET tasks, BLS pay and projections, and peer-reviewed AI-exposure research. Sources shown.
Data snapshot SNAPSHOT-2026-11-06. How it works
AI / softwarerange 23.7 to 47.7
Physical / roboticsrange 33.9 to 57.9
When the change is likely
Largely unaffectedlocal demand growing
What to do about it
Use AI to outpace AI.
Strategies to protect your livelihood, most important first.
1
Stay sharp; urgency is low
This role looks durable. Keep your skills current and watch for shifts in your field.
2
Move up from the task to the system
Robotics targets the physical work. Shift toward supervising, maintaining, or programming the automation instead of competing with it.
3
Build a financial buffer
Keep 6 to 12 months of expenses and diversify your income, so a disruption is a setback rather than a catastrophe.
4
Add a recognised credential
A certification or license raises the bar against automation and signals value in a tightening market.
Keep the monitor on
Free shows where you stand today. JobBreak Monitor writes your full AI-researched plan and keeps watching, so you know the moment your outlook shifts.
Free
$0
See exactly where you stand.
Full job-risk score & timeline
Task-by-task exposure breakdown
One starter strategy
AI-researched personal plan
Ongoing monitoring & alerts
Current plan
Keep ahead
JobBreak Monitor
$3.99/mo
$29/yr
or $29/yr save 39%
that's about $2.42/mo, billed yearly
Your full researched plan, plus a watch on your job.
Everything in Free
Full AI-researched, cited action plan
Resume-aware personalisation
Re-run your plan any time
Alerts when your outlook shifts
Start monitoring
Secure checkout by Stripe. Cancel anytime.
Which of my tasks are exposed
Write programs in the language of a machine's controller and store programs on media, such as punch tapes, magnetic tapes, or disks.
45.9
Determine the sequence of machine operations, and select the proper cutting tools needed to machine workpieces into the desired shapes.
50.0
Revise programs or tapes to eliminate errors, and retest programs to check that problems have been solved.
50.0
Analyze job orders, drawings, blueprints, specifications, printed circuit board pattern films, and design data to calculate dimensions, tool selection, machine speeds, and feed rates.
45.9
Write instruction sheets and cutter lists for a machine's controller to guide setup and encode numerical control tapes.
45.9
Observe machines on trial runs or conduct computer simulations to ensure that programs and machinery will function properly and produce items that meet specifications.
50.0
Enter computer commands to store or retrieve parts patterns, graphic displays, or programs that transfer data to other media.
45.9
Modify existing programs to enhance efficiency.
50.0
Longer, orange bars are more automatable; short green bars are resistant.
What is driving my result
lowers risk
raises risk
Task: Determine the sequence of machine operations, and select the proper cutting tools needed to machine workpieces into the desired shapes.
Task: Revise programs or tapes to eliminate errors, and retest programs to check that problems have been solved.
Local demand is growing
How this score is calculated
Map Computer Numerically Controlled Tool Programmers to its standard O*NET task list (8 core tasks).
Score each task for AI/software exposure (Eloundou et al. 2023) and physical/robotics exposure (an O*NET work-context proxy), each 0 to 100.
The two axis scores are the task averages: AI 35.7, robotics 45.9.
The timeline comes from the higher axis (45.9), shifted for local demand (growing), and seniority. It is read against your remaining working years.
Ranges are about ±12 points. A backtest against real BLS employment change shows the risk ranking holds in aggregate, but individual outcomes are predicted weakly, so results are ranges, never a flat verdict.
Sources: O*NET, Eloundou et al. (2023), GPTs are GPTs, O*NET Work Context, BLS CPI-U, BLS OEWS.
Snapshot SNAPSHOT-2026-11-06. Full method and backtest on How it works.