← Risk register SOC 51-2021 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Coil Winders, Tapers, and Finishers

12,840 US workers · median $48,220/yr · Production

COOKED

The core work — winding wire onto forms, taping and insulating coils, dipping and lacing leads, checking turns counts and continuity — is repetitive bench work already handled by CNC winding machines and automated taping lines in high-volume plants. What keeps the remaining 12,840 jobs alive is low-volume, large, or odd-geometry work (traction motors, custom transformers, motor rewind shops) where fixturing an automated line isn't worth it, plus hand finishing and machine tending. That's a shrinking niche, and the pressure comes from mechanical automation and offshoring rather than language AI.

10-year outlook: Employment keeps sliding as high-volume winding stays automated or offshored; the durable work is custom winding and on-site motor rewind repair.

US employment, 2019–2025+1.2%
12,69012,840 workers

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

Median pay $36,520 → $48,220 +5.6% in real terms (nominal +32.0%, 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

-6.3% 12,200 → 11,500 on the projections basis

Exposed, and shrinking

Both signals point the same way: the tasks are largely automatable and the BLS projects -6.3% 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.

~1,200 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.

TaperWinderMechanicAssemblerConnectorCoil MakerCoil TaperPlug WirerAuto-WinderCable WirerCoil FormerCoil WinderCore WinderHand WinderWire BenderWire CoilerWire WinderWire WorkerCoil BuilderEncapsulatorHand MounterMotor WinderSkein WinderStem Mounter

Score — 28/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (11/20). Weakest point: liability shield (1/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 10 + 11 + 1 + 2 + 4 = 28. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 10/20

Mixed — a routine tier and a judgment tier A 10 reflects the split: programmable winding machines already handle turns counting, wire tensioning, and layer indexing on standard bobbins, but hand-taping a 4,000 lb traction motor stator, lacing leads in a rewind shop, and stripping and re-forming burnt field coils still need a person at the bench, which is why this sits mid-band rather than down at 4.

Embodiment 11/20

Some physical or field component An 11 is right because the work is physical — feeding wire, dipping coils in varnish, working around hot ovens and solvent fumes, lifting stator frames — but it happens at a fixed bench or machine station inside a plant with jigs and fixtures, not out in an uncontrolled field environment like a lineworker or millwright.

Liability shield 1/20

No licence, no signature requirement A 1 is accurate: nothing you do requires a state licence or certification card, the coil ships under the manufacturer's UL or IEEE insulation-class listing, and if a winding fails hipot or shorts in service it's the plant's QC and engineering signatures that answer for it, not yours.

Trust premium 2/20

Anonymous artifact production A 2 fits because the customer buys a motor or transformer and never learns who wound it; a coil that passes continuity, turns ratio, and surge comparison tests is interchangeable with one wound by any other shop, and purchasing decisions turn on price and lead time.

Judgment & accountability 4/20

Executes defined procedures on defined inputs A 4 acknowledges the real calls you make — spotting a nicked enamel before it becomes a turn-to-turn short, deciding a varnish dip needs a second pass, judging tension on fine wire — but these are read against a winding sheet, print, and spec sheet that already fix turns, wire gauge, and insulation class, with a supervisor or engineer owning any deviation.

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: embodiment

How to future-proof this job

Training paths for your skill gaps: Apprenticeship.gov — paid, employer-sponsored trade apprenticeships, searchable by trade and ZIP paid to train · Apprenticeship.gov — industrial maintenance and millwright programs paid to train · MIT OpenCourseWare — circuits, systems and diagnostic method, free and ungated free · OSHA Outreach Training — the 10- and 30-hour cards most employers ask for low · Apprenticeship.gov — electrical, HVAC, plumbing and fitting programs that pay while you learn paid to train · Khan Academy — mathematics, arithmetic through calculus 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.

Gas Compressor and Gas Pumping Station Operators EXPOSED · 41/100 · you already have ~58% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Repairing, Equipment Maintenance, Troubleshooting, Operation and Control

Sheet Metal Workers SAFE · 67/100 · you already have ~53% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Installation, Repairing, Equipment Maintenance, Mathematics

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 39/100 — EXPOSED.

4 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening task resistance +3

    Task-mix shift within the surviving niche: as CNC winders swallow all repeatable geometries, what remains is diagnostic rewind work — stripping a burned 4160V traction or mill motor, reverse-engineering a coil with no surviving drawing from the damaged original, deciding slot fill, insulation class and connection scheme, and forming odd-geometry coils by hand. EASA-member rewind shops already describe this as the bulk of their work. This raises task_resistance without any new law, but on a shrinking base of jobs.

  • already happening judgment accountability +3

    Consolidation of the winder role with the repair-decision role in small rewind shops: the same person judges whether a core is salvageable, whether to rewind or scrap a $200k traction motor, and signs the surge/hipot results. Where headcount shrinks to a handful, that call stops being escalated. Watch for job postings merging 'coil winder' with 'motor repair technician / test technician'.

  • plausible embodiment +3

    Field/on-site rewind and taping work in situ — large generator stator rewinds, wind turbine nacelle and hydro generator coil replacement done at height or inside the machine rather than on a bench. If growth in wind O&M and grid transformer repair shifts more coil work to unfixturable field settings (already a stated service line at shops serving utilities), the physical unpredictability rises.

  • plausible liability shield +2

    Insulation-system and repair conformance certification attaching to a named person: EASA/ANSI AR100 rewind conformance, IEEE 1068 motor repair standard, or IEC/UL insulation-system qualification being required by utility and OEM purchase specs with a signed test-and-repair record. Also IEEE 43/95 winding test reports signed for warranty. This shields the shop and the certified test technician, not the bench winder, so the ceiling here is low.

The limit. No realistic route to a trust premium: buyers of coils and rewinds specify performance and test results, never a human maker, and there is no consumer-facing artisanal market. The binding constraint is not AI at all — it is mechanical automation of high-volume winding plus offshoring of transformer and motor manufacture, so even the best case here is a smaller, more skilled occupation rather than a safer one. Total realistic headroom is roughly 10-12 points, landing mid-40s at best.

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 40 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

Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 760 $47,460 -2%
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 440 $44,060 -9%
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 300 $45,330 -6%
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY 280 $61,990 +29%
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 270 $45,810 -5%
Memphis, TN-MS-AR 240 $42,050 -13%
Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC 230 $60,380 +25%
Cleveland, OH 230 $47,770 -1%

Best paid

Appleton, WI 40 $66,630 +38%
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA 220 $63,230 +31%
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY 280 $61,990 +29%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $48,220. 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 28. 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.