← Risk register SOC 33-1012 · reviewed 2026-08-11

First-Line Supervisors of Police and Detectives

154,610 US workers · median $106,040/yr · Protective Service

SAFE

A police sergeant or lieutenant spends the shift responding to scenes, taking incident command, making use-of-force and arrest-authority calls, and handling personnel discipline — none of which a model can own. The automatable slice is real but administrative: report review and correction, shift scheduling, crime-stat compilation, and drafting routine memos and grant paperwork. Sworn status and statutory authority mean a certified human must sign the arrest approval, the use-of-force review, and the pursuit termination decision.

10-year outlook: Headcount holds roughly steady; the paperwork half of the job compresses as report-writing and analytics automate, pushing sergeants further toward scene command, accountability review, and personnel oversight.

US employment, 2019–2025+27.4%
121,340154,610 workers

Headcount grew steadily across the period.

Median pay $91,090 → $106,040 -6.9% in real terms (nominal +16.4%, 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

+2.9% 160,800 → 165,400 on the projections basis

Hard to automate, and growing

The work resists current AI and the BLS projects +2.9% 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.

~10,900 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.

CaptainLieutenantPort WardenChief DeputyPolice ChiefDesk SergeantDeputy SheriffPatrol CaptainPolice CaptainPost CommanderDetective ChiefPatrol SergeantPolice SergeantPatrol CommanderPrecinct CaptainShift SupervisorTraffic SergeantPolice LieutenantPolice SupervisorSafety SupervisorDetective SergeantTraffic LieutenantTraffic SupervisorHarbor Patrol Chief

Score — 76/100 resistance

Holding it up: judgment & accountability (18/20). Weakest point: trust premium (12/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 14 + 16 + 16 + 12 + 18 = 76. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 14/20

Tasks largely resist digitisation Approving a felony arrest at 0300, taking incident command on a barricaded-subject call, and sitting a subordinate down for a Garrity-warned interview are the bulk of the shift, and the software-friendly residue — CAD report kickbacks, roll-call scheduling, monthly UCR/NIBRS compilation — is why this sits at 14 and not 18.

Embodiment 16/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments Supervisors roll to the scene rather than watch it: foot pursuits, crowd lines, MVA and homicide scene control, physically supervising cell blocks and evidence handling, all in weather and traffic and hostile crowds, which puts it at 16 rather than 20 only because a real share of hours are spent at a desk on reports and CompStat prep.

Liability shield 16/20

Licensed human required and personally liable POST/state certification is the statutory precondition for the sworn authority you exercise, your name goes on the use-of-force review and the pursuit-termination order, and §1983 supervisory-liability and failure-to-train claims land on you personally — decertification, not just termination, is the exposure.

Trust premium 12/20

Some relationship component Your officers' willingness to tell you the truth about a bad stop before IA finds it, and the community-meeting standing you build in your sector, carry real weight, but the arrest, the call for service, and the report are executed on statutory authority regardless of who the sergeant is — hence 12, not 17.

Judgment & accountability 18/20

Exists to be accountable for ambiguous calls Deadly-force authorization, terminating a pursuit into a school zone, deciding whether a use-of-force incident goes to IA or ends with counseling, and a Graham v. Connor reasonableness call made in seconds with no supervisor above you on scene at night — these are unreviewable in the moment and litigated for years after.

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, licensure, liability, judgment

How to future-proof this job

Where to go deeper on what this job runs on: Khan Academy — reading and vocabulary, all levels, free free · Coursera — active listening and communication skills free to audit · Toastmasters — public speaking practice at local clubs worldwide low · Coursera — critical thinking and logic, audit free free to audit · edX — performance measurement and evaluation free to audit · Coursera — communication and interpersonal skills free to audit

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 83/100, still SAFE.

3 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening liability shield +3

    State POST (Peace Officer Standards and Training) boards or consent-decree language explicitly requiring a named supervisor of record to review and personally certify every AI-assisted report, license-plate-reader hit, or facial-recognition identification before it supports probable cause — already the pattern in Detroit's 2024 ACLU settlement over facial recognition, which mandates supervisory corroboration and bars FR alone as an arrest basis. Broad adoption across states would raise this.

  • already happening judgment accountability +2

    Post-Floyd duty-to-intervene and supervisory-liability statutes (e.g., Colorado SB20-217, Illinois SAFE-T Act) plus DOJ consent decrees naming sergeants as accountable for subordinate force reviews; further erosion of qualified immunity for supervisors, or state civil-rights acts allowing direct suit against supervisors, would tighten this.

  • already happening task resistance +2

    Task-mix shift: if Axon Draft One-style report generation and automated scheduling/CompStat tools absorb the administrative tier, the residual shift is scene command, force review, and discipline — none currently modelable. Countervailing: report review is itself a core sergeant task, so automation of drafting increases review load rather than removing it.

The limit. Near the practical ceiling at 76. Trust premium has no route: policing is a monopoly public service with no buyer choosing between a human and machine supervisor, so willingness-to-pay for humanness cannot be expressed. Realistic gains are confined to liability formalization and the judgment tier.

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 360 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 13,970 $135,270 +28%
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 5,050 $125,960 +19%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 4,840 $167,600 +58%
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA 4,460 $81,860 -23%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 3,800 $135,080 +27%
Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH 3,720 $108,190 +2%
Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD 3,440 $124,660 +18%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 3,250 $119,540 +13%

Best paid

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 1,690 $175,840 +66%
Vallejo, CA 150 $175,070 +65%
Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA 70 $172,590 +63%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $106,040. 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 76. 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.