← Risk register SOC 49-9092 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Commercial Divers

3,450 US workers · median $72,990/yr · Trades

SAFE

Commercial diving is underwater welding, cutting, rigging, salvage, concrete repair and pier/hull inspection — dexterous work in zero-visibility, high-current environments no current robot handles. The real automation pressure is not language AI but ROVs and AUVs, which have already taken a large share of deep offshore inspection and survey work; that squeezes the deep-sea tier while inland, harbor, bridge, dam and marine-construction diving stays human. Certification (ADCI, OSHA 29 CFR 1910 Subpart T, NDT and welding tickets) plus inspection sign-off gives a real but non-licensure shield.

10-year outlook: Deep offshore inspection keeps shifting to ROVs while inland construction, salvage and infrastructure repair diving remains stubbornly human — expect a flat, small, well-paid occupation that increasingly pairs a diver with a vehicle.

US employment, 2019–2025+0.9%
3,4203,450 workers

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

Median pay $49,980 → $72,990 +16.8% in real terms (nominal +46.0%, 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

+8.5%

Percentage only. The projection counts a different population from the 3,450 above — it includes self-employed workers, which for this occupation is most of them, so the two headcounts are not comparable.

Hard to automate, and growing

The work resists current AI and the BLS projects +8.5% more of these jobs by 2034. Note that safe does not mean well paid — several of the fastest-growing resistant occupations are among the lowest paid on the register.

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.

~400 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 — 23 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.

DiverTenderPlongeurDivemasterNavy DiverSkin DiverDive TenderRoute DiverScuba DiverDiver TenderMarine DiverSalvage DiverAquarium DiverDeep Sea DiverHard Hat DiverCertified DiverSubmarine DiverCommercial DiverUnderwater WelderArea Commercial DiverUnder Water Assistant (U/W Assistant)Non Destructive Testing Underwater Welder (NDT U/W Welder)Non Destructive Testing Under Water Welder (NDT U/W Welder)

Score — 67/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (20/20). Weakest point: trust premium (8/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 17 + 20 + 9 + 8 + 13 = 67. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 17/20

Tasks largely resist digitisation Stick-welding a wet patch by feel in black water, cutting a fouled prop with a broco torch, and rigging lift bags on a sunken barge are tasks where hand pressure and touch substitute for sight — the 17 rather than 20 reflects that ROVs genuinely absorbed deep-water visual inspection, tank surveys and pipeline survey hours that used to be dive jobs.

Embodiment 20/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments You are inside the hazard: pressure, tides, entrapment, differential pressure at intake gratings, decompression obligations, and surface-supplied umbilical management — there is no version of this work performed from a chair, which is why it sits at the ceiling.

Liability shield 9/20

Certification preferred, not legally required ADCI cards, OSHA Subpart T dive-team requirements, AWS D3.6 wet-welding qualifications and NDT Level II tickets are all real gates, but they are employer-and-association credentials, not a state licence — the diver's name on an inspection report doesn't carry the personal statutory liability a PE stamp on the bridge report does, and the PE or dive supervisor above you absorbs it.

Trust premium 8/20

Some relationship component Work arrives through contractor prequalification, union hall and repeat client relationships with port authorities and DOTs rather than through anyone asking for you personally, though a superintendent who has watched you handle a zero-viz pile repair will request your crew by name on the next mobilization.

Judgment & accountability 13/20

Meaningful discretion The dive supervisor and the diver in the water make irreversible calls on their own — abort on a current shift, whether that scour hole undermines the pier footing, whether the tag line is fouled enough to blow bailout — under decompression tables and dive plans that constrain but never cover the water you are actually in, which is why it lands at 13 and not in procedure-following territory.

Scored twice. An independent second run returned 67/100 — SAFE, agreeing with the verdict above.

This score sits on a verdict boundary. At 67/100 it is one point from EXPOSED. Re-scoring moves results by a point or two, so here the score is more informative than the label.

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

Where to go deeper on what this job runs on: Coursera — critical thinking and logic, audit free free to audit · Coursera — active listening and communication skills free to audit · edX — operations management and process monitoring courses free to audit · Toastmasters — public speaking practice at local clubs worldwide low · Coursera — quality control and inspection courses, auditable free free to audit · OSHA Outreach Training — the 10- and 30-hour cards most employers ask for low

All 35 skills ranked by how many jobs they open →

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 82/100, still SAFE.

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

    As ROVs absorb survey and visual inspection, remaining human dives concentrate on go/no-go calls: entry into confined penstocks, live-boat decisions in current, tag-out verification on intakes. If ROV data conflicts with diver observation and the diver's call governs (as in nuclear-plant and dam intake work under FERC dam-safety inspection requirements), ownership of the consequential call rises

  • already happening task resistance +2

    Two-tier shift: routine hull cleaning, pipeline survey and deep-water IMR go to ROV/AUV and robotic hull crawlers, leaving repair, salvage, obstructed-space and confined-penstock work that resists both robots and remote operation. The daily task mix becomes harder even as headcount in the deep tier falls

  • plausible liability shield +4

    State DOT / FHWA underwater bridge inspection rules (NBIS 23 CFR 650) tightened so that Level II/III underwater element inspections must be performed and signed by a diver-inspector who is also a licensed Professional Engineer or certified bridge inspection team leader, with personal liability for the condition rating — several state DOTs already require PE-stamped dive reports; a federal mandate would generalize it

  • plausible liability shield +3

    ADCI/OSHA Subpart T revision (long-discussed) creating a licensed 'Diving Supervisor' credential with named personal accountability for dive plans and hyperbaric decisions, replacing today's employer-designated supervisor; also API/AWS D3.6M underwater welding requiring a named certified welding inspector's personal sign-off on wet welds

  • plausible trust premium +3

    Marine insurers and classification societies (ABS, DNV, Lloyd's) requiring diver-verified in-water survey rather than ROV-only imagery for in-water survey in lieu of drydocking credit — ABS already restricts which IWS scopes accept remote inspection; a hardening of that rule makes buyers pay specifically for a human presence

The limit. Embodiment is already maxed and task_resistance near-maxed, so the score has little headroom from capability dimensions; the risk is not displacement by AI but headcount contraction as ROVs shrink the deep offshore tier. A higher per-worker score can coexist with far fewer workers.

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 9 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

Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 100 $50,920 -30%
Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL 100 —
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL 90 $55,440 -24%
Virginia Beach-Chesapeake-Norfolk, VA-NC 90 $62,820 -14%
Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT 70 $59,690 -18%
San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, CA 60 $101,550 +39%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 50 $84,200 +15%
Urban Honolulu, HI 50 $95,750 +31%

Best paid

San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, CA 60 $101,550 +39%
Urban Honolulu, HI 50 $95,750 +31%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 50 $84,200 +15%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $72,990. 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 67. 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.