← Risk register SOC 35-9011 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Dining Room and Cafeteria Attendants and Bartender Helpers

542,750 US workers · median $33,980/yr · Food

EXPOSED

Almost nothing in this job is text or screen work: clearing and wiping tables, hauling bus tubs, restocking glassware and garnish trays, refilling water, mopping spills, and setting up cafeteria lines are physical tasks in crowded, unpredictable rooms that current robotics handles poorly. The real threat isn't language AI — it's business-model change: self-bussing fast-casual layouts, tray-return systems, kiosk ordering, and tray-delivery robots that let one attendant cover more floor. There is no license, no signature, and little discretion, so the only moat is embodiment, and that moat protects the task more than the headcount.

10-year outlook: The tasks won't be automated away in ten years, but restaurant layouts and tray-return tech will keep squeezing how many attendants each dining room needs, so pay stays low and headcount drifts downward.

US employment, 2019–2025+13.7%
477,270542,750 workers

Dipped in 2020, then grew past where it started.

Median pay $23,470 → $33,980 +15.8% in real terms (nominal +44.8%, 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% 527,400 → 560,600 on the projections basis

Exposed, but growing

AI can already do a lot of these tasks, and the BLS still expects +6.3% more of these jobs by 2034. Demand for the output is growing faster than the work is being automated away — the mechanism BLS gives for software developers, and the combination people most often misread as an error.

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.

~99,600 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.

BusboyBusserIcemanBarbackBarmaidBus BoyBar BackBus PersonCafe HelperFloorpersonFood RunnerLine ServerTray SetterKitchen AideBar AttendantWater CarrierCafeteria AideClub AttendantFood ExpeditorKitchen HelperLunchroom AideSilver StewardSilver WrapperBeverage Server

Score — 41/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (17/20). 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: 15 + 17 + 1 + 5 + 3 = 41. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 15/20

Tasks largely resist digitisation Stacking a bus tub of mixed china and stemware, spot-wiping a booth between seatings, and cutting fruit garnish during a rush are all tasks that require judging where things are and how much force to use in a room full of moving people — that's a 15 rather than an 18 because the ordering, tab-splitting, and tray-return steps around you have already been offloaded to kiosks and drop stations.

Embodiment 17/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments You are on your feet a full shift on wet tile, reaching over occupied tables, carrying loaded trays through service doors, and handling broken glass and hot dish-machine racks — a 17 not 20 only because it's indoors on a known floor plan rather than outdoors or on unmapped sites.

Liability shield 1/20

No licence, no signature requirement No credential stands between you and replacement: at most a food handler card that costs an afternoon and a small fee, no scope of practice, and no state statute that says the bussing must be done by a licensed person, so the 1 reflects the ServSafe-style card existing at all.

Trust premium 5/20

Anonymous artifact production A few regulars will notice who keeps their water full and cafeteria students learn one attendant's name, but the check is written to the restaurant and management can put a different person on your section tomorrow with no customer complaint — that's what holds it at 5 instead of a server's or bartender's higher relationship value.

Judgment & accountability 3/20

Executes defined procedures on defined inputs Bus in this order, sanitizer at this concentration, wet-floor sign here, discard anything left uncovered — the calls you make are which table to hit first and when to flag a spill, which is real but bounded, and no decision of yours ends up in an incident report signed in your name.

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, physical-presence

How to future-proof this job

Training paths for your skill gaps: Coursera — work planning and personal productivity free to audit · Coursera — engineering and procurement courses, auditable without paying free to audit · MIT OpenCourseWare — full course materials across every department, free free · OSHA Outreach Training — the 10- and 30-hour cards most employers ask for low · MIT OpenCourseWare — problem-solving and analytical method courses free · Coursera — negotiation courses, audit free free to audit · Coursera — negotiation, influence and persuasion courses 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.

Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners EXPOSED · 54/100 · you already have ~84% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Time Management

Cooks, Restaurant EXPOSED · 57/100 · you already have ~82% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Equipment Selection, Time Management, Active Learning, Operation and Control

Butchers and Meat Cutters EXPOSED · 51/100 · you already have ~81% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Complex Problem Solving, Negotiation, Persuasion, Time Management

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 53/100, still EXPOSED.

5 specific changes that would raise this score
  • plausible trust premium +3

    If the tipped-service segment where guests visibly reward human floor presence expands — e.g. state elimination of the tip credit (DC Initiative 82, Chicago's One Fair Wage ordinance) pushing full-service restaurants toward higher-check, higher-touch formats where table maintenance by a person is part of the sold experience rather than a cost line

  • plausible liability shield +3

    Food-safety rules that name a trained person for sanitation tasks: if state adoption of FDA Food Code provisions on certified food protection managers is extended so that surface-sanitizing, allergen cleaning between seatings, and glassware handling must be performed or verified by a ServSafe-certified employee — not a machine cycle — the busser role acquires a documented, auditable sign-off

  • plausible judgment accountability +3

    If dram-shop liability enforcement pushes bars to make barbacks and floor staff part of the documented over-service and ID-check chain (state responsible-beverage-service mandates, e.g. Texas TABC or Utah training requirements applied to all bar personnel, not just servers), the role starts owning intervention calls on visibly intoxicated guests

  • plausible embodiment +2

    Nothing raises the physical difficulty itself, but the score can hold at its ceiling if restaurant layouts stay dense and unpredictable — e.g. if the fine-dining and full-service segment grows relative to fast-casual self-bussing, or if local fire/ADA aisle-width rules and crowded urban footprints keep tray-delivery robots (Bear Robotics/Pudu deployments) confined to wide-aisle chains. Watch for hotel and casino union contracts (UNITE HERE Local 11 in California) that cap robot use or require staffing ratios per covered section.

  • unlikely task resistance +1

    Genuine two-tier shift is weak here: when tray return and self-bussing remove the routine clearing tier, what remains is more physical exception work (spills, broken glass, unstable guests) but not a protected judgment tier — headcount falls rather than the remaining job hardening

The limit. Realistic ceiling is low-to-mid 50s. Embodiment is already near max and cannot rise further; the threat is headcount compression through layout and business-model change, which no dimension on this register captures. Liability and judgment gains would attach mainly to the bar-adjacent and hotel-union slices of the occupation, not to cafeteria attendants.

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 382 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

New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 37,600 $36,980 +9%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 24,860 $35,800 +5%
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 18,600 $21,050 -38%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 18,100 $31,200 -8%
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 16,740 $21,850 -36%
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL 16,490 $34,710 +2%
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 13,800 $37,260 +10%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 10,990 $32,220 -5%

Best paid

Kahului-Wailuku, HI 840 $61,230 +80%
Urban Honolulu, HI 2,500 $50,200 +48%
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 3,630 $45,120 +33%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $33,980. 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 41. 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.