← Risk register SOC 43-3011 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Bill and Account Collectors

158,830 US workers · median $47,030/yr · Office

COOKED

The core loop — pull the account file, dial the debtor, deliver scripted disclosures, negotiate a payment plan inside pre-set authority limits, log the disposition, mail the validation letter — is exactly the text-and-voice work current AI performs at usable quality, and self-service payment portals already remove many calls entirely. FDCPA and state agency licensing constrain how collection happens but almost never require a licensed individual on the call, so there is no personal liability shield. What survives is thin: high-balance or disputed accounts, skip tracing with fragmented evidence, hardship judgment calls, and compliance oversight of the automated contact channel itself.

10-year outlook: Headcount shrinks substantially over ten years as AI voice agents and self-service portals absorb first-contact and routine payment-plan work, leaving a smaller tier focused on disputed accounts, compliance oversight, and pre-litigation files.

US employment, 2019–2025-32.7%
235,870158,830 workers

Most of this decline happened after 2021 — it is not the pandemic dip.

Median pay $37,000 → $47,030 +1.7% in real terms (nominal +27.1%, 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

-10.5% 166,900 → 149,400 on the projections basis

Exposed, and shrinking

Both signals point the same way: the tasks are largely automatable and the BLS projects -10.5% by 2034. This is the case where the score and the forecast agree, and it is the one worth taking seriously.

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.

~13,700 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.

ChaserDunnerCollectorRepossessorBill CollectorData CollectorDebt CollectorRent CollectorCar RepossessorField CollectorClaims CollectorCollection AgentCollection ClerkCredit SpecialistInstallment AgentMedical CollectorPayment CollectorAccounts CollectorCredit CoordinatorRepossession AgentCollections AnalystCollections OfficerInsurance CollectorTelephone Collector

Score — 20/100 resistance

Holding it up: judgment & accountability (6/20). Weakest point: embodiment (1/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 5 + 1 + 3 + 5 + 6 = 20. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 5/20

Core tasks are already automatable Dialing from a queue, reading the mini-Miranda, taking a card payment, setting up a 6-month arrangement inside the authority matrix, and coding the account NOAN or PTP are all fully scriptable steps that voice AI and IVR/portal flows already run end to end — the 5 rather than 0 reflects genuinely hard skip tracing on stale addresses and untangling a debtor who claims identity theft or a bankruptcy stay.

Embodiment 1/20

Fully desk- and screen-based The entire shift is a headset, a dialer, and a CRM screen in a call-center seat; nothing in the job requires leaving the chair — repossession and field visits belong to other roles entirely.

Liability shield 3/20

No licence, no signature requirement State collection-agency licenses and bonds attach to the agency, not to you; FDCPA and TCPA violations land on the employer or the creditor, and you can be trained onto the floor in weeks with no exam, so the 3 is only for the collector-registration and background-check requirements a few states impose on individual employees.

Trust premium 5/20

Anonymous artifact production Debtors do not choose their collector and mostly want the call to end, but the 5 acknowledges that on long-term arrangements and commercial receivables the same person calling back month after month materially improves the cure rate.

Judgment & accountability 6/20

Executes defined procedures on defined inputs Settlement percentages, hardship deferrals, and interest waivers come off a pre-approved matrix with anything unusual escalated to a supervisor, and the consequential calls — charge-off, litigation referral, credit reporting — are made by the creditor, leaving you discretion over tone, timing, and when to flag a dispute.

This occupation has already been through one. Headcount fell 41.5% between 2017 and 2025 — 271,700 to 158,830 — while the median wage held roughly flat in real terms (+ 2.1% after inflation). A job being commoditised usually loses pay along with headcount. One that shrinks by half while pay holds is leaving a specialist core behind, and the score above was assigned from the occupation title without sight of that history — so it may be describing the job this used to be rather than the people still doing it. Why this is a known limit.

Confidence: high · 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: judgment

How to future-proof this job

Training paths for your skill gaps: Khan Academy — reading and vocabulary, all levels, free free · Coursera — critical thinking and logic, audit free free to audit · Learning How to Learn — the most-taken course on Coursera, and free free to audit · Khan Academy — mathematics, arithmetic through calculus free · OSHA Outreach Training — the 10- and 30-hour cards most employers ask for low · Apprenticeship.gov — industrial maintenance and millwright programs paid to train · Coursera — quality control and inspection courses, auditable free free to audit

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.

Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents EXPOSED · 34/100 · you already have ~75% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Reading Comprehension, Critical Thinking, Learning Strategies, Mathematics

Court Reporters and Simultaneous Captioners EXPOSED · 34/100 · you already have ~60% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Operation and Control, Equipment Maintenance, Quality Control Analysis

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 37/100 — EXPOSED.

5 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening task resistance +4

    Genuine two-tier structure: if bots absorb first-contact, payment-plan-within-authority, and portal deflection, the residual role is disputed-debt investigation, skip tracing on fragmented/conflicting identity evidence, FDCPA dispute validation under §1692g, and bankruptcy/deceased/cease-communication handling. Watch for BLS/agency staffing mixes where the collector headcount falls but median wage rises — the signature of tier collapse upward.

  • already happening liability shield +3

    TCPA enforcement treating AI voice agents as 'artificial or prerecorded voice' (the FCC's Feb 2024 AI-voice declaratory ruling already says AI-cloned voices are covered), so calls without prior express consent carry per-call statutory damages. That pushes outbound dialing back onto live humans for any account lacking documented consent.

  • plausible liability shield +5

    A state licensing regime that names a personally accountable individual for collection communications — e.g., NY DFS Part 1 debt collector rules or Massachusetts Div. of Banks licensing amended to require a designated licensed compliance manager to attest to, and be personally liable for, every automated/AI-generated dunning contact and validation notice. Today licensure attaches to the agency, not a person on the call.

  • plausible judgment accountability +3

    Hardship and ability-to-pay determinations becoming a regulated, documented decision: e.g., CFPB medical-debt rules and state hospital financial-assistance statutes (CA AB 1020) that require a documented affordability determination before referral or continued collection, with the determiner named in the file.

  • plausible judgment accountability +2

    A CFPB supervisory expectation or consent order requiring a human reviewer to approve any AI-recommended escalation to litigation, credit furnishing, or wage garnishment — parallel to the human-review conditions appearing in recent UDAAP consent orders.

The limit. Trust premium has no realistic route — no debtor pays extra to be dunned by a human, and creditors buy recovery rate and compliance exposure, not humanness. Embodiment is structurally near zero. Even with every lever above, the realistic ceiling is a much smaller occupation of compliance-officer-like specialists rather than a restored 158k-person call floor: the levers raise per-worker defensibility, not headcount.

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 304 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 8,950 $47,790 +2%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 6,650 $57,440 +22%
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 6,210 $54,370 +16%
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ 5,140 $47,740 +2%
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 4,660 $44,670 -5%
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL 3,990 $46,870 +0%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 3,950 $49,390 +5%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 3,840 $49,110 +4%

Best paid

San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 660 $77,360 +64%
Napa, CA 80 $77,160 +64%
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 1,450 $72,430 +54%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $47,030. 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 20. 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.