{
  "source": "Cooked Index — occupational AI risk register",
  "page": "https://cookedindex.com/jobs/fabric-and-apparel-patternmakers/",
  "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": "Fabric and Apparel Patternmakers",
    "soc_code": "51-6092",
    "category": "Production",
    "us_employment": 2950,
    "median_annual_wage": 62750
  },
  "verdict": "EXPOSED",
  "risk_resistance": 34,
  "contested": false,
  "near_boundary": true,
  "dimensions": {
    "task_resistance": 7,
    "embodiment": 12,
    "liability_shield": 1,
    "trust_premium": 6,
    "judgment_accountability": 8
  },
  "reasoning": {
    "task_resistance": "Grading and marker-making are already one-click operations in Gerber/Lectra, and CLO's parametric blocks now generate a first pattern from a sketch — what keeps this at 7 rather than 3 is that muslin draping on a dress form, pinning out a bias-cut swing, and diagnosing why a rib-knit sleeve twists on a fit model still require hands on cloth that no solver reproduces reliably.",
    "embodiment": "A 12 reflects a job split roughly evenly between a CAD workstation and a cutting table — walking hard-paper or tag-board patterns, notching, pinning muslin on a form, and standing through fittings — all inside a controlled sample room, not on a roof or a job site, which is what keeps it out of the 13+ band.",
    "liability_shield": "There is no state licence, no exam, no registered stamp on a pattern; a graded nest that comes out short-yielding is caught by the cutter or the sample maker and reworked internally, so nothing legally attaches to your name — hence 1, not zero only because an ASTM/ISO spec-sheet signoff occasionally carries your initials.",
    "trust_premium": "A 6 acknowledges that designers who trust a specific patternmaker to interpret their sketch send work back to that person for years, but the deliverable is a graded pattern file that any competent shop can open and use — the buyer never meets you and does not care who drafted it.",
    "judgment_accountability": "Deciding ease allowances, where to place a dart versus a princess seam, and how much to shrink for a 4% wool relax are real calls made from experience rather than a table, but they are reversible at the next fitting and reviewed by a designer or technical director before production cutting — that review loop is why this is 8 and not 14."
  },
  "rationale": "The screen half of this job — drafting blocks in Gerber/Optitex/CLO, grading a base pattern across a size range, nesting markers for cutting efficiency, writing spec sheets — is exactly the parametric, rules-driven work that software already automates well and generative 3D tools are eating faster. What survives is physical: draping muslin on a form, reading how a specific knit or bias-cut fabric actually behaves, and correcting fit on a live model during a fitting session. This occupation sits right on the COOKED/EXPOSED line mainly because it has no licensure, no client accountability shield, and has already been thinned by offshoring, so automation lands on an eroded base.",
  "outlook": "Expect continued shrinkage in the CAD-grading and marker-making tier, with the remaining jobs concentrating into sample rooms, fit specialists, and small-batch or technical apparel shops where hands on fabric still decide the outcome.",
  "what_would_raise_it": {
    "levers": [
      {
        "dimension": "task_resistance",
        "change": "Task-mix shift: as CAD grading, marker nesting and spec-sheet writing get fully automated, the residual role is fit correction on live bodies and material behavior judgment — draping bias-cut silk, unstable knits, stretch swimwear, and adaptive/plus-size fit where 3D avatar simulation still fails to predict drape. Watch for job postings that drop 'Gerber/Optitex proficiency' as the headline requirement and lead with 'fit technician / draping' instead.",
        "plausibility": "already happening",
        "would_add": 4
      },
      {
        "dimension": "embodiment",
        "change": "Growth of adaptive apparel and made-to-measure lines (Zappos Adaptive, Tommy Adaptive, Nike FlyEase) where each body is an outlier and pattern correction must be done on a real person or custom form rather than a standard block; also onshore sample rooms rebuilt for speed-to-market, which push more hands-on first-sample work back into US patternmaking.",
        "plausibility": "plausible",
        "would_add": 3
      },
      {
        "dimension": "trust_premium",
        "change": "Continued expansion of bespoke tailoring, bridal, and costume/theatrical work where the buyer is paying explicitly for a named cutter's hand — plus union-shop custom work under IATSE Local 764/Local 705 in film and stage costume, where a credited human patternmaker is contractually part of the deliverable.",
        "plausibility": "plausible",
        "would_add": 3
      },
      {
        "dimension": "judgment_accountability",
        "change": "If US textile/apparel traceability and content-claim enforcement tightens (FTC Green Guides revision, NY Fashion Act-style bills, EU Digital Product Passport applied to US exporters), someone must own the call that a graded pattern and marker actually match the declared fiber content, yield, and waste claims — making the patternmaker or tech-design lead the signing owner of spec accuracy rather than an anonymous input.",
        "plausibility": "unlikely",
        "would_add": 3
      }
    ],
    "ceiling_note": "There is no realistic route to a liability_shield here: no state or federal body licenses patternmakers, and no professional association is pursuing certification with personal legal exposure. Even with every lever above, this stays a small, offshored, non-licensed craft occupation — the levers change what the surviving 2,950 jobs look like, not how many there are."
  },
  "adjudication": {
    "method": "two independent runs agreed on the verdict",
    "outcome": "corroborated",
    "run_totals": [
      34,
      39
    ],
    "run_verdicts": [
      "EXPOSED",
      "EXPOSED"
    ]
  },
  "employment_history": {
    "points": [
      {
        "y": 2017,
        "emp": 4810,
        "wage": 40460
      },
      {
        "y": 2018,
        "emp": 5220,
        "wage": 40560
      },
      {
        "y": 2019,
        "emp": 5870,
        "wage": 45070
      },
      {
        "y": 2020,
        "emp": 4670,
        "wage": 49680
      },
      {
        "y": 2021,
        "emp": 3220,
        "wage": 58650
      },
      {
        "y": 2022,
        "emp": 3070,
        "wage": 60320
      },
      {
        "y": 2023,
        "emp": 2670,
        "wage": 62510
      },
      {
        "y": 2024,
        "emp": 2860,
        "wage": 67670
      },
      {
        "y": 2025,
        "emp": 2950,
        "wage": 62750
      }
    ],
    "from": 2017,
    "to": 2025,
    "change_pct": -38.7,
    "comparable_from": 2019,
    "spans_soc_revision": true
  },
  "pivots": [],
  "license": "https://cookedindex.com/terms"
}