{ "source": "Cooked Index — occupational AI risk register", "page": "https://cookedindex.com/jobs/computer-numerically-controlled-tool-programmers/", "methodology": "https://cookedindex.com/methodology", "notice": "Verdicts are re-examined as evidence accumulates. Re-fetch before relying on this; the page above always carries the current score.", "scored_at": "2026-08-11", "model": "claude-opus-5", "occupation": { "title": "Computer Numerically Controlled Tool Programmers", "soc_code": "51-9162", "category": "Production", "us_employment": 28500, "median_annual_wage": 68120 }, "verdict": "EXPOSED", "risk_resistance": 35, "contested": false, "near_boundary": false, "dimensions": { "task_resistance": 8, "embodiment": 10, "liability_shield": 2, "trust_premium": 5, "judgment_accountability": 10 }, "reasoning": { "task_resistance": "Feature recognition in Mastercam/Fusion already generates roughing and finishing passes from a solid model and pulls speeds from a tool library, so the programming half of the job is largely pattern-matching — the 8 rather than a 4 reflects the proveout half: deciding how a thin-wall part will be held across three ops, dialing back a pass because the spindle is loading up, and editing G-code at the control when the fixture sits 0.015 off nominal.", "embodiment": "You are at the machine for setup sheets, tool presetting, touching off work offsets, single-blocking the first article and listening for chatter — but it's a climate-controlled shop with the part clamped in a known fixture, not field work, which is why this lands at 10 and not with the millwrights and riggers.", "liability_shield": "No license, no stamp, no certification anyone checks — an AS9100 or ISO audit trail names the shop and the inspector, and when a program crashes a spindle the exposure is scrap and downtime absorbed by the employer, not a personal legal claim against you.", "trust_premium": "Output is a program file and a setup sheet judged by whether the part passes CMM inspection; the machinists and engineers you work with daily give you some standing, but a customer buying the part never learns your name and the work transfers to another programmer without renegotiation.", "judgment_accountability": "You own real calls — op sequencing to control distortion, where to leave stock for finish, whether to trust a 3-plus-2 approach over full 5-axis on a tight-tolerance feature — but they land inside a print with stated tolerances and a first-article inspection that catches you before anything ships, capping this below the ambiguous-stakes band." }, "rationale": "The core of this job — translating a CAD model into toolpaths, picking feeds and speeds, generating and post-processing G-code — is exactly the pattern work CAM vendors are already automating with feature recognition, tool libraries, and automated roughing/finishing strategies. What resists is the part that happens at the machine: fixturing and workholding decisions, dry runs and first-article proveout, reading chatter and tool wear, and rescuing a program when the setup doesn't match the model. There is no license here and no signature requirement, so the only durable moat is shop-floor judgment that the programmer personally owns.", "outlook": "Expect programming headcount per shop to fall as CAM automation absorbs routine toolpath generation, with the remaining roles consolidating into setup-and-proveout specialists who live on the floor rather than at a seat.", "what_would_raise_it": { "levers": [ { "dimension": "task_resistance", "change": "As CAM feature recognition and automated toolpath generation absorb the routine 2.5D/prismatic tier, the remaining programming work concentrates on 5-axis simultaneous, thin-wall and exotic-alloy work, deburring-free finishing, and multi-op fixture strategy where the model does not encode the setup. Watch for shops where the programmer title merges with 'manufacturing engineer' or 'process owner' — the job that remains is proveout, fixture design and process qualification, not code generation.", "plausibility": "already happening", "would_add": 4 }, { "dimension": "embodiment", "change": "If shops keep pushing high-mix low-volume and one-off/repair work (aerospace MRO, medical implants, defense spares), the programmer stays at the machine doing workholding, indicator setup, first-article dial-in and chatter diagnosis — tasks that require hands on the spindle. Conversely a shift to long-run production with pallet pools and automated probing lowers this.", "plausibility": "plausible", "would_add": 3 }, { "dimension": "liability_shield", "change": "AS9100 / NADCAP and ITAR-adjacent regimes already require named-person process qualification records and first-article inspection sign-off (AS9102 FAI forms). If primes tighten this so that the person who authored or approved the machining program must personally sign the FAI and the process qualification — rather than a QA generalist — a genuine named-signature requirement attaches. Watch for prime-contractor supplier quality clauses naming the program author on AS9102 Form 3.", "plausibility": "plausible", "would_add": 4 }, { "dimension": "judgment_accountability", "change": "On safety-critical parts (rotating aero components, implants, pressure-boundary work), if a shop formally assigns the programmer ownership of the machining process spec — feeds/speeds affecting residual stress, surface integrity, tool-change intervals — then scrap, escapes and field failures trace to their call under ambiguity. Watch for FAA/FDA-driven process-control requirements (e.g. FDA QSR/ISO 13485 process validation for implant machining) naming a responsible engineer for the machining process.", "plausibility": "plausible", "would_add": 4 } ], "ceiling_note": "Trust premium has no realistic route: buyers purchase parts to print, not a named programmer, and no customer will pay more because a human wrote the G-code. The liability and accountability levers are real but they attach to the manufacturing-engineer role the job is being absorbed into, not to 'CNC programmer' as a standalone title — the occupation may survive by ceasing to exist under that name." }, "adjudication": null, "employment_history": { "points": [ { "y": 2019, "emp": 25570, "wage": 56450 }, { "y": 2020, "emp": 25530, "wage": 57740 }, { "y": 2021, "emp": 25800, "wage": 60780 }, { "y": 2022, "emp": 28120, "wage": 60800 }, { "y": 2023, "emp": 28030, "wage": 63440 }, { "y": 2024, "emp": 28230, "wage": 65670 }, { "y": 2025, "emp": 28500, "wage": 68120 } ], "from": 2019, "to": 2025, "change_pct": 11.5, "comparable_from": 2019, "spans_soc_revision": false }, "pivots": [ { "slug": "electro-mechanical-and-mechatronics-technologists-and-technicians", "title": "Electro-Mechanical and Mechatronics Technologists and Technicians", "verdict": "EXPOSED", "risk_resistance": 55, "median_wage": 73900, "overlap": 75, "skills_to_close": [ "Installation", "Repairing", "Troubleshooting", "Science" ] }, { "slug": "industrial-machinery-mechanics", "title": "Industrial Machinery Mechanics", "verdict": "SAFE", "risk_resistance": 67, "median_wage": 64520, "overlap": 70, "skills_to_close": [ "Repairing", "Installation", "Equipment Maintenance", "Operation and Control" ] }, { "slug": "electrical-and-electronics-repairers-commercial-and-industrial-equipment", "title": "Electrical and Electronics Repairers, Commercial and Industrial Equipment", "verdict": "SAFE", "risk_resistance": 67, "median_wage": 74090, "overlap": 67, "skills_to_close": [ "Installation", "Repairing", "Equipment Maintenance", "Persuasion" ] } ], "license": "https://cookedindex.com/terms" }