← Risk register SOC 53-1047 · reviewed 2026-08-11

First-Line Supervisors of Transportation and Material Moving Workers, Except Aircraft Cargo Handling Supervisors

623,640 US workers · median $62,890/yr · Transportation

EXPOSED

The modal worker here is a warehouse, dock, yard, or transit supervisor who spends the day on a floor or in a yard directing loaders, drivers, and forklift operators — that physical presence and crew management is not automatable, but the planning layer around it is. Route sequencing, shift rostering, load assignment, dwell-time and productivity reporting, and DOT logbook checks are already being absorbed by WMS/TMS optimization engines and telematics dashboards. What holds is the human who walks the dock, handles a no-show or a jackknifed trailer, disciplines and trains a churning crew, and owns the safety incident when OSHA shows up.

10-year outlook: Headcount per site shrinks as scheduling and dispatch software absorbs the planning work and spans of control widen, but a physical human accountable for the crew and the safety record stays on every dock and yard.

US employment, 2019–2025+36.9%
455,390623,640 workers

Headcount grew steadily across the period.

Median pay $55,060 → $62,890 -8.6% in real terms (nominal +14.2%, 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

+3.7% 609,600 → 632,200 on the projections basis

Growing, and only partly exposed

The BLS expects +3.7% more of these jobs by 2034, and at 52/100 the work is only partly exposed — some tasks are automatable, the core of the job is not. Nothing here is in tension.

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.

~61,300 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.

BoatswainDock BossGang BossGrip BossChute BossHatch BossRoadmasterTrainmasterFarm ManagerPort StewardShip StewardYard ForemanYard ManagerCargo ManagerFleet ManagerFlight PurserRoute ManagerCab SupervisorCar SupervisorDriver ManagerHub SupervisorYard ConductorAgency OperatorDirt Contractor

Score — 52/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (14/20). Weakest point: liability shield (5/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 11 + 14 + 5 + 9 + 13 = 52. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 11/20

Mixed — a routine tier and a judgment tier About half of a shift lead's actual clock — dispatch sequencing, trailer door assignments, driver hours-of-service pre-checks, productivity and dwell reports, overtime calculations — is already handled by Manhattan/Blue Yonder WMS, Samsara telematics, and labor-standards modules, while the other half (walking the dock at 4am, re-crewing around three call-outs, coaching a new forklift operator who keeps clipping racking) has no software substitute, which is exactly what an 11 means rather than a 6.

Embodiment 14/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments You are on a concrete floor, a rail yard, or a bus platform in whatever weather it is, climbing into trailers to verify loads, spotting for reversing equipment, and physically walking a spill or a downed pallet — uncontrolled outdoor and mixed-traffic environments push this to 14, held short of higher only because you direct rather than operate the equipment most of the shift.

Liability shield 5/20

Certification preferred, not legally required There is no license gate on this job — a CDL, a powered-industrial-truck trainer cert under 29 CFR 1910.178(l), or an OSHA 30 card helps you get hired but no statute makes you personally answerable, and when a citation lands it goes to the employer as the responsible party, so the 5 reflects certification-preferred, not protected.

Trust premium 9/20

Some relationship component The value is in the crew knowing you'll back them and in a driver or dock lead taking your word on a hot load, which is real but portable — customers, shippers, and the receiving DC deal with the company account, not with you by name, so a departure changes the shift's mood and not the contract.

Judgment & accountability 13/20

Meaningful discretion You decide in real time whether a rig goes out with a marginal brake reading, whether to send a fatigued driver home and eat the missed delivery, and whether an incident is recordable — calls with DOT, OSHA, and injury consequences made without a lawyer or a procedure that covers the specific case, which is a 13; it stops short of 14+ because network-level and capital decisions sit above you.

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, judgment

How to future-proof this job

All 35 skills ranked by how many jobs they open →

Where this experience transfers — nothing clears the bar

No occupation passed every test: close enough to first-line supervisors of transportation and material moving workers, except aircraft cargo handling supervisors on skills and subject matter, at least 10 points more resistant, no big jump in training, no new licence, no pay cut, and not shrinking on its own. That happens for 223 of the 654 occupations here that aren't SAFE, and it is worth stating plainly rather than leaving the section off.

The usual reason is that exposure travels with the skill profile. The jobs most similar to yours tend to be exposed for the same reasons yours is, so the near neighbours don't clear the gap — and the ones that do are a different kind of work, not a transfer of what you already know. Read that as a limit of this method, not a verdict that you're stuck: it only compares whole occupations, and it cannot see specialisation, industry, or anything you'd bring that isn't in a federal skill survey.

What would move this occupation up is the other direction, and on this page it's the more useful one.

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 63/100, still EXPOSED.

4 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening liability shield +4

    FMCSA/state enforcement or insurer requirements that name a designated, individually-certified human safety supervisor as the accountable signer for hours-of-service falsification, hazmat load certification (49 CFR 172.704 trained-person sign-off), and crane/rigging lift plans — extending the existing pattern where OSHA cites a named 'competent person' and hazmat shippers' certifications require a specific trained employee. Also watch state warehouse quota laws (CA AB 701, NY, WA, MN) that require a named supervisor to furnish and defend written quota records.

  • already happening task resistance +2

    Two genuine tiers exist here: the planning/reporting tier (route sequencing, dwell reports, logbook checks) and the crew tier (discipline, no-shows, incident handling, training a churning workforce). If the planning tier is fully absorbed, the measured remaining day is dominated by tasks current systems cannot do — but the honest note is that this raises the score only because the job shrinks, and headcount per site typically falls with it.

  • plausible judgment accountability +3

    As WMS/TMS engines take route sequencing, rostering and load assignment, the residual role is exception ownership: overriding an algorithmic quota or dispatch call under CA AB 701-style laws, deciding to pull an unsafe driver or ground equipment, and being the deposed witness after an injury. Task-mix shift plus any board/OSHA rule making the override decision individually documented and attributable raises this.

  • plausible embodiment +2

    Little upward room — the physical presence is already scored high. A modest rise if union contracts (Teamsters warehouse and transit agreements) explicitly require a bargaining-unit supervisor physically on-shift rather than a remote control-tower supervisor covering multiple sites, blocking the centralization that currently reduces on-floor presence.

The limit. No plausible route to a higher trust premium: the buyer is the employer, not an end customer, and nobody pays a premium for a human dock supervisor by name. The dominant threat is not task automation but remote consolidation — one supervisor covering four sites via camera and telematics — which the liability and union levers slow but do not stop.

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 393 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 35,860 $71,510 +14%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 22,930 $62,190 -1%
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 19,490 $60,260 -4%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 19,280 $68,330 +9%
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA 16,900 $65,290 +4%
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 15,320 $60,760 -3%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 12,050 $62,820 +0%
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 11,610 $69,920 +11%

Best paid

Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 8,250 $76,390 +21%
Casper, WY 310 $76,290 +21%
Walla Walla, WA 100 $75,800 +21%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $62,890. 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 52. 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.