← Risk register SOC 53-1041 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Aircraft Cargo Handling Supervisors

9,760 US workers · median $58,170/yr · Transportation

EXPOSED

The desk half of this job — load planning, weight-and-balance computation, manifest reconciliation, crew scheduling, delay reporting — is already handled by airline load-control software and will absorb more AI. The ramp half is not: directing loaders around a live aircraft, verifying hazmat placarding and cargo restraint by hand, catching a mis-tagged pallet before pushback, and owning the safety call when weather or a ground-damage event scrambles the plan. Scored for the modal ramp/cargo supervisor at a passenger or freight carrier, not a centralized load-control specialist.

10-year outlook: Headcount thins as load planning centralizes into software-driven control centers, but a supervisor physically on the ramp signing off on hazmat, restraint, and safety stays employed through the decade.

US employment, 2019–2025+2.7%
9,5009,760 workers

Roughly flat across the period, with year-to-year wobble.

Median pay $53,850 → $58,170 -13.6% in real terms (nominal +8.0%, less ~25% US inflation over the period)

The job count is not the verdict

This line is counted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics — the one figure on this page that isn't a judgement of ours. Headcount moves on demand, offshoring, demographics and the business cycle, and automation is one term among several, often not the loudest.

So a falling line is not evidence that AI did it, and a rising one is not evidence that it won't. Both happen in this register: some occupations resist automation and shrink anyway, others are highly automatable and keep growing. The marked year is 2020.

BLS projection, 2024–2034

+5.2% 10,300 → 10,800 on the projections basis

Growing, and only partly exposed

The BLS expects +5.2% more of these jobs by 2034, and at 57/100 the work is only partly exposed — some tasks are automatable, the core of the job is not. Nothing here is in tension.

Different clocks. The score is what current AI could do to this work today. The projection is how many of these jobs will exist in 2034. Everything between the two — how fast employers actually adopt, whether demand grows in the meantime — is why they can point opposite ways without either being wrong.

~1,100 openings a year on average, including replacing people who leave.

One email if this score changes. Watch as many occupations as you like from the same address — no account, and nothing is sent on a schedule, only when a verdict actually moves.

Also known as — 24 job titles this covers

Titles reported by people doing this work, from the US Department of Labor's O*NET survey. If your job title is here, this page is about your work even though the name doesn't match.

BoatswainDock BossGang BossGrip BossRamp BossChute BossHatch BossLoadmasterRoadmasterTrainmasterFarm ManagerPort StewardShip StewardYard ForemanYard ManagerCargo ManagerFleet ManagerFlight PurserRoute ManagerCab SupervisorCar SupervisorDriver ManagerHub SupervisorYard Conductor

Score — 57/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (17/20). Weakest point: trust premium (6/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 12 + 17 + 8 + 6 + 14 = 57. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 12/20

Mixed — a routine tier and a judgment tier The load sheet, ULD build plan, and manifest reconciliation are already generated by systems like Sabre/AHM tools with the supervisor pressing accept, but nobody has automated walking the hold to confirm a 463L pallet's net is tensioned, that a DGR shipment's segregation matches the NOTOC, or that the belt loader operator stops before contacting the fuselage — roughly half the shift resists, which is why this sits at 12 rather than 16.

Embodiment 17/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments This is ramp work in whatever the weather does: inside cargo holds at outside-air temperature, on wet aprons under jet blast, hand-checking tiedowns and lock latches, riding K-loaders, and doing it inside an active aircraft movement area where a positioning error becomes ground damage — 17 rather than 20 only because a meaningful share of the shift is spent at a terminal reconciling paperwork.

Liability shield 8/20

Certification preferred, not legally required No FAA airman certificate protects this role — the credentials are employer-issued and program-based (IATA/49 CFR 175 hazmat recurrent training, SIDA badge, GSE operating authorizations), and when a load is out of CG or an undeclared lithium shipment gets aboard, enforcement lands on the certificate holder — the airline — with the supervisor exposed to termination and badge pull rather than personal license revocation, which is what puts this at 8 instead of 3.

Trust premium 6/20

Some relationship component Flight crews, dispatch, and freight forwarders care that the load sheet is correct and the aircraft closes on time, not who signed it; the relationship value is limited to the accumulated credibility with a specific station's captains and the handling agents who know which supervisor's ramp doesn't damage freight — real, but replaceable across shifts, hence 6.

Judgment & accountability 14/20

Exists to be accountable for ambiguous calls When a last-minute AVI or human-remains shipment arrives, a pallet weight is obviously wrong, or a thunderstorm cell forces ramp closure mid-load, the supervisor decides whether to offload, reweigh, re-sequence, or hold the departure — calls made in minutes against pushback pressure with the safety-of-flight consequence real, though bounded by the carrier's GOM and weight-and-balance limits, which keeps it at 14 rather than 18.

Confidence: medium · reviewed 2026-08-11 · how scoring works

What this job involves — and which parts are yours

The verdict above describes this occupation as a whole. Almost nobody does the typical version of a job — tick what's actually in your week and see how your own mix sits.

AI already does these at usable quality

These still need a person

Active moats on the surviving side: embodiment, physical-presence, judgment

How to future-proof this job

Training paths for your skill gaps: Apprenticeship.gov — industrial maintenance and millwright programs paid to train · Apprenticeship.gov — paid, employer-sponsored trade apprenticeships, searchable by trade and ZIP paid to train · OSHA Outreach Training — the 10- and 30-hour cards most employers ask for low · MIT OpenCourseWare — finance and accounting free

All 35 skills ranked by how many jobs they open →

Where this experience transfers — occupations you could move toward

Computed from U.S. Dept. of Labor O*NET skill and knowledge profiles: high overlap with what you already do, a materially higher resistance score, no large jump in required training, and no licence you would have to start a new pipeline to get. Targets that pay meaningfully less, that are themselves COOKED, or whose own headcount is falling are excluded — a move into a shrinking trade is not an escape.

Captains, Mates, and Pilots of Water Vessels SAFE · 74/100 · you already have ~58% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Equipment Maintenance, Repairing, Operation and Control, Management of Financial Resources

What would move this back up — beyond any one person

The moves above are yours to make. This is the other half: what would have to change in the world for the occupation itself to score higher. None of it is in any one person's gift, but it is where the floor actually comes from. Scores here are not a one-way ratchet. Only two of the five dimensions — task resistance and embodiment — track what machines can do. The other three track law, what buyers will pay for, and who is answerable, and those move in both directions, often in response to the same pressure AI creates. If every lever below landed, this occupation would score around 72/100 — SAFE.

5 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening judgment accountability +3

    Carrier SMS (Safety Management System, required under 14 CFR Part 5) designating the ramp/cargo supervisor as the accountable person for ground-damage and load-integrity hazard reports, making the stop-work / reject-the-aircraft call a documented, individually-attributed decision rather than a dispatcher's.

  • already happening task resistance +3

    Task-mix shift: once load-control software absorbs manifest reconciliation, weight-and-balance math and delay coding, the residual job is exception handling — mis-tagged pallets, restraint verification, hazmat discrepancies, weather and ground-damage recovery. This raises the resistance of the remaining role without any new law, though it also shrinks headcount per station.

  • already happening embodiment +1

    Little upward room; already 17. Airside ramp work in live-aircraft environments with weather, jet blast and non-standard cargo is among the least automatable settings, and autonomous ramp tugs/loaders (in trial at Amsterdam, Changi) automate the moving, not the supervising.

  • plausible liability shield +5

    FAA rulemaking or carrier ops-spec language requiring a named, certificated person (e.g., a load planner/weight-and-balance signatory under the carrier's FAA-approved Weight and Balance Control Program in the Ops Specs) to personally sign the final loading instruction report and hazmat acceptance checklist, with AI output treated as advisory only. Precedent exists: 49 CFR 175.30 hazmat acceptance requires a trained person's verification, and IATA DGR requires a named acceptance-check signatory. A rule explicitly barring automated acceptance checks would harden this.

  • plausible liability shield +3

    Post-accident NTSB recommendation after a load-shift or hazmat event traced to automated load planning, prompting FAA to require human countersignature on any AI-adjusted load plan change after doors close.

The limit. No plausible route to a higher trust premium: cargo shippers and passengers never see this role and cannot pay a premium for a human in it. Also note the headcount risk — consolidation of load control into centralized remote centers (already standard at major carriers and third-party providers) can cut the number of these positions even as the per-job scores rise.

These are conditions, not forecasts — what would have to happen, not what will. Specific rules, cases and bills are named so you can go and check whether they exist and where they stand; verify before relying on any of them. Nothing here is legal or financial advice.

Where this work is, and what it pays there

BLS metro figures for 45 areas. The verdict above does not change by city — the rubric judges what the work involves, not where it happens — but pay and headcount do, and the national median hides a very wide range.

Most of these jobs

Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 690 $53,220 -9%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 680 $60,530 +4%
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN 460 $34,110 -41%
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 390 $56,040 -4%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 380 $70,780 +22%
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL 360 $65,540 +13%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 300 $80,820 +39%
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 280 $49,290 -15%

Best paid

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA 130 $81,380 +40%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 300 $80,820 +39%
Charleston-North Charleston, SC 40 $80,140 +38%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $58,170. Counts are jobs in that metro, not vacancies. Metros where the BLS suppressed the cell are absent rather than shown as zero.

Who is actually doing this — nobody, on the record

We have no reported case of a named organisation automating this occupation. Not one deployment, not one announcement.

That is worth saying out loud next to a score of 57. The verdict above is about what the work exposes — what current AI could do to these tasks. It is not a claim that anyone has done it. For this occupation those two things have come apart completely: the capability argument is on this page, and the evidence column is empty.

Read that as a gap in the reporting we can see, not proof of absence — the dispatch runs on English-language feeds and misses plenty. If you know of a case, tell us, or add a field report from inside the job.

Quick take — do you do this job?

Has AI actually changed your work? One tap, anonymous, and the running tally is public. Nothing else is asked of you.

Self-reported and unverified — a sentiment signal, not a survey. One response per person per occupation; you can change your answer.

Field reports — what people say has changed

No field reports yet. A written account takes a paragraph rather than a tap, goes to an editor before it appears, and is the one thing on this page the rubric cannot produce on its own.

File a field report

Concrete beats general: a tool that arrived, a task that moved, a headcount decision you watched happen. Don't include anything that identifies you or your employer if that would put you at risk.

Watch this verdict
Kept current

Rather than check back: get the digest and we'll tell you what changed — or watch a single occupation from its own page.