← Risk register SOC 43-4071 · reviewed 2026-08-11

File Clerks

73,440 US workers · median $43,600/yr · Office

COOKED

The core of the job — coding, sorting, indexing, scanning and retrieving records, purging per retention schedules — is exactly what document AI and records-management software already do at scale, and the digitization wave that eliminated most paper rooms is still running. What remains is physical: pulling boxes, handling medical or legal originals, chain-of-custody moves within an office, and that keeps the role alive as a shrinking hybrid clerk/office-support position rather than a standalone file job. No license, no sign-off, no client relationship insulates it.

10-year outlook: Employment keeps contracting sharply through the 2030s as paper archives finish digitizing; the survivors are absorbed into records-management and health-information roles that administer systems rather than shelves.

US employment, 2019–2025-28.2%
102,30073,440 workers

Part 2020 shock, part continued decline in the years since.

Median pay $32,710 → $43,600 +6.6% in real terms (nominal +33.3%, 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

-15.9% 84,300 → 70,900 on the projections basis

Exposed, and shrinking

Both signals point the same way: the tasks are largely automatable and the BLS projects -15.9% 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.

~7,300 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.

ClerkFilerListerIndexerCut FilerMap ClerkPre CoderCard FilerFile ClerkFile KeeperIndex ClerkClaims ClerkClerk TypistFiling ClerkRecord ClerkComputer AideImaging ClerkInvoice CoderLine AssignerRecord KeeperBrand RecorderCut File ClerkDocument ClerkScanning Clerk

Score — 16/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (7/20). 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: 4 + 7 + 1 + 2 + 2 = 16. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 4/20

Core tasks are already automatable Alphanumeric sorting, indexing by patient MRN or case number, keying metadata into an EDMS, and flagging files past a retention date are rule-based operations that OCR plus a records system executes without a person; the 4 rather than 0 reflects the residual work of reconciling mislabeled or damaged originals that nobody scanned correctly the first time.

Embodiment 7/20

Some physical or field component You pull banker's boxes off shelves, run the scanner feed, unjam it, deliver charts to a floor, and shred — real physical work, but it happens in a climate-controlled office or basement records room with predictable shelving, which is why this sits at 7 and not with the field trades in the teens.

Liability shield 1/20

No licence, no signature requirement There is no state license, no certification exam, no signature line on anything you touch; if a file goes missing the HIM director or the custodian of record answers for it, and the 1 rather than 0 only acknowledges that HIPAA and court-records rules do formally name you as a handler.

Trust premium 2/20

Anonymous artifact production Requesters know the file arrived, not who fetched it — attorneys and nurses phone the records line, not you by name, and a temp can cover your desk on Monday with no one downstream noticing.

Judgment & accountability 2/20

Executes defined procedures on defined inputs The retention schedule, the filing convention, and the release-of-information policy are all written down before you arrive; your discretion tops out at deciding which supervisor to ask when a document doesn't match any existing category.

This occupation has already been through one. Headcount fell 38.2% between 2017 and 2025 — 118,840 to 73,440 — while the median wage held roughly flat in real terms (+ 11% after inflation). A job being commoditised usually loses pay along with headcount. One that shrinks by half while pay holds is leaving a specialist core behind, and the score above was assigned from the occupation title without sight of that history — so it may be describing the job this used to be rather than the people still doing it. Why this is a known limit.

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

How to future-proof this job

Training paths for your skill gaps: MIT OpenCourseWare — circuits, systems and diagnostic method, free and ungated free · Coursera — active listening and communication skills free to audit · Apprenticeship.gov — industrial maintenance and millwright programs paid to train · Khan Academy — mathematics, arithmetic through calculus free · Coursera — critical thinking and logic, audit free free to audit · Toastmasters — public speaking practice at local clubs worldwide low · Coursera — teaching and instructional design, audit free free to audit · MIT OpenCourseWare — systems analysis and engineering free · MIT OpenCourseWare — problem-solving and analytical method courses 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.

Court Reporters and Simultaneous Captioners EXPOSED · 34/100 · you already have ~66% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Troubleshooting, Active Listening, Equipment Maintenance

Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents EXPOSED · 34/100 · you already have ~60% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Mathematics, Critical Thinking, Speaking, Instructing

Private Detectives and Investigators EXPOSED · 56/100 · you already have ~57% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Critical Thinking, Systems Analysis, Complex Problem Solving, Speaking

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 28/100, still COOKED.

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

    Backfile conversion and legacy-paper handling in domains where originals must be physically preserved — court exhibit rooms under state record-retention statutes, hospital legacy charts, land/deed registries, and litigation hold boxes. Wet-signature originals, sealed exhibits, and radiographic film cannot be shredded post-scan, so physical pull/refile/chain-of-custody work persists as the last defensible tier. If a state judiciary or medical board tightens original-document retention rather than permitting scan-and-destroy, this holds or rises modestly.

  • plausible liability shield +4

    Certified evidence-handling roles: if courts extend chain-of-custody attestation requirements (already routine for evidence technicians and some ediscovery custodians under FRE 901/902(13)-(14) authentication practice) to records custodians generally, requiring a named human to attest that a produced record is the complete original set. A named custodian-of-record affidavit is already demanded in many civil productions; formalizing it as a credentialed role would attach a person to the signature.

  • plausible judgment accountability +3

    Task-mix shift: once indexing and OCR classification are automated, what remains is exception handling — deciding whether a document falls under legal hold, whether a purge is defensible, whether a privileged item was mis-tagged. Where the file clerk role merges into records-management/RIM analyst work carrying destruction-authorization sign-off, the surviving position owns consequential calls. This depends on the employer retaining a human approver on the retention-destruction workflow rather than auto-purging.

  • plausible task resistance +2

    If HIPAA, GLBA, or CJIS-style access rules — or an insurer's cyber policy — bar sending records to third-party AI/cloud processing, scanning and indexing stay in-house and human for sensitive corpora. CJIS security policy already constrains cloud handling of criminal justice data.

The limit. Even with every lever, this occupation stays low. The levers preserve a shrinking remnant inside records-management or court-clerk job families, not the standalone file clerk title; headcount decline continues regardless of score. No route to a trust premium exists — no buyer pays extra for a human to file.

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 250 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

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 3,930 $48,450 +11%
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 3,260 $44,710 +3%
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 3,170 $42,850 -2%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 2,640 $58,320 +34%
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 2,580 $41,400 -5%
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL 1,920 $45,760 +5%
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 1,700 $43,270 -1%
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA 1,640 $46,700 +7%

Best paid

San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 540 $60,840 +40%
Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA 60 $60,530 +39%
Salinas, CA 80 $59,040 +35%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $43,600. 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 16. 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.