← Risk register SOC 39-3011 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Gambling Dealers

83,910 US workers · median $34,320/yr · Personal Care

EXPOSED

Dealing cards, spinning roulette, paying bets and managing chip stacks is dexterous physical work in a controlled room — language AI does none of it, but electronic table games, automated shufflers, stadium roulette terminals and live-dealer streaming already replace dealer headcount without needing any AI breakthrough. The real product is pace, patter and the sense that a person is watching the game, and casinos keep human tables on the high-limit floor precisely because players pay for that. Gaming-board licensing keeps the labor pool controlled but carries no personal sign-off liability, so it slows substitution rather than blocking it.

10-year outlook: Table count and dealer headcount keep shrinking as electronic and stadium games take the low-limit floor, while human dealers concentrate in high-limit pits, craps, and tourist-experience properties.

US employment, 2019–2025-15.1%
98,89083,910 workers

Nearly all of this fall was the 2020 shock. It has been climbing back since.

Median pay $21,260 → $34,320 +29.1% in real terms (nominal +61.4%, 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

-0.6% 88,700 → 88,100 on the projections basis

Shrinking, but not obviously because of AI

The BLS projects -0.6% by 2034, but at 54/100 this work is only moderately exposed — not the profile of a job current AI can simply do. Occupations shrink for many reasons, and the score does not point at automation as this one's cause.

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.

~14,100 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.

DealerCroupierCard DealerCard GraderDice DealerFaro DealerGaming HostKeno DealerCrap ShooterCraps DealerGames DealerPoker DealerCasino DealerCasino WorkerGame OperatorGaming DealerBig Six DealerPai Gow DealerBaccarat DealerGambling DealerRoulette DealerBlackjack DealerDual Rate DealerBlack Jack Dealer

Score — 54/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (14/20). Weakest point: judgment & accountability (7/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 13 + 14 + 8 + 12 + 7 = 54. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 13/20

Mixed — a routine tier and a judgment tier Pitching cards, cutting chips, computing 17-to-1 roulette payouts in your head and calling the game aloud is manual work no text model touches, but electronic blackjack terminals, auto-shufflers and stadium baccarat already do the entire deal-and-pay loop on real floors today — that proven non-AI substitution is what holds this at 13 instead of the high teens.

Embodiment 14/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments You stand on your feet the whole 20-and-20, reaching across a live layout to place bets, break chips, spin a wheel and physically control the deck under camera and pit-boss sightlines — hands-on, but in a climate-controlled room with fixed geometry and no weather or unpredictable terrain, which caps it at 14 rather than a linesman's 18.

Liability shield 8/20

Certification preferred, not legally required A state gaming board card or sheriff's work permit is mandatory and can be pulled for a bad decision, so casinos can't staff a pit with anyone off the street; but you don't sign a payout ticket in your own name — the floor supervisor and the property's license absorb the exposure on a misdeal or a wrong pay, which puts this at 8 rather than in licensed-professional territory.

Trust premium 12/20

Some relationship component On the high-limit tables regulars ask for you by name, tip you directly, and stay at your game because of the pace you set and how you talk them through a losing shoe — but the $10 blackjack pit rotates you every 20 minutes by design, so most of your shift is interchangeable, which is why 12 and not 16.

Judgment & accountability 7/20

Meaningful discretion Procedure covers almost everything you do — house rules on hitting soft 17, when to call the pit for a fill or a color-up, exact hand-clearing motions for surveillance — with real discretion only in reading whether a player is capping a bet or a partner is signaling, and that call gets escalated rather than acted on, so 7.

Confidence: medium · 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, trust, licensure

How to future-proof this job

Training paths for your skill gaps: edX — supply chain and inventory management free to audit · Learning How to Learn — the most-taken course on Coursera, and free free to audit · MIT OpenCourseWare — full course materials across every department, free 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.

Bartenders SAFE · 68/100 · you already have ~64% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Management of Material Resources, Learning Strategies, Active Learning, Complex Problem Solving

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 67/100 — SAFE.

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

    High-limit and baccarat play is already the segment where players demand a live dealer; if casinos formalize this — e.g. marketing 'all-human dealt' salons, or Asian VIP baccarat contracts specifying human dealing and no auto-shufflers — the human-preference share becomes contractual rather than incidental. Live-dealer streaming studios (Evolution Gaming) also monetize the human face explicitly, and their headcount growth is a real, checkable indicator that buyers pay for a visible person.

  • already happening task resistance +3

    If automation absorbs the low-limit, high-volume tier (blackjack, stadium roulette) first, the surviving job is the two-tier judgment layer: reading advantage players, catching collusion, managing intoxicated or aggressive patrons, running complex-side-bet baccarat and poker where dealer-controlled pace and rulings matter. Headcount falls but the residual role is harder to do.

  • plausible liability shield +4

    State gaming regulations that require a licensed human dealer or floor supervisor to be physically present at, and personally accountable for, each live table — e.g. Nevada Gaming Commission or NJ DGE rules capping electronic table games per floor, or minimum live-table counts written into municipal casino licenses (as in some Ohio, Maryland and Illinois host-community agreements) and union contracts. If such minimums are enacted or defended in the next license renewal cycle, substitution is capped by rule rather than preference.

  • plausible judgment accountability +3

    If dispute-resolution authority is pushed down to the dealer rather than up to the pit — dealers formally empowered to rule on ambiguous bet placement, string bets, misdeals and card exposure with the call standing on record for gaming-board audit — the role owns consequential calls. Card-room floor-person duties merging into dealer classification in union job descriptions (Culinary Local 226, UAW-represented Detroit casinos) would be the visible marker.

The limit. These levers protect the remaining role's character, not the number of jobs — every mechanism here is compatible with a much smaller dealer workforce concentrated on high-limit and poker floors. Displacement pressure comes from electronic table games and stadium terminals, not language models, so improving AI barely moves this occupation and stalling AI barely helps it.

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 35 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

Las Vegas-Henderson-North Las Vegas, NV 15,530 $25,690 -25%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 4,180 $35,090 +2%
Atlantic City-Hammonton, NJ 3,010 $33,000 -4%
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL 2,710 $39,970 +16%
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 2,580 $34,560 +1%
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 2,410 $60,490 +76%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 2,400 $31,200 -9%
San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, CA 1,810 $35,840 +4%

Best paid

Bremerton-Silverdale-Port Orchard, WA 150 $63,830 +86%
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 2,410 $60,490 +76%
Yakima, WA 190 $59,250 +73%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $34,320. 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 54. 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.