← Risk register SOC 31-1132 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Orderlies

52,440 US workers · median $38,290/yr · Healthcare Support

EXPOSED

Orderlies transfer patients between beds, gurneys and wheelchairs, reposition immobile bodies, transport specimens and equipment, and clean rooms — none of which language models touch and none of which today's robots do safely around frail humans. The exposure is not AI replacing the work but software squeezing it: automated dispatch and transport-request systems, tracking of bed turnover, and AGV carts for supplies and linens erode the non-patient portion of the shift and let hospitals staff thinner. There is no license or personal liability shield here, and the discretion is real but narrow — recognizing that a patient looks wrong and escalating.

10-year outlook: Demand grows with the aging population and the work stays hands-on, but pay stays low and hospitals will use dispatch software and transport robots to cover more patients per orderly — the path up is certification into CNA or a surgical/sterile-processing tech role.

US employment, 2019–2025+11.6%
46,99052,440 workers

Dipped in 2020, then grew past where it started.

Median pay $28,980 → $38,290 +5.7% in real terms (nominal +32.1%, 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

+3.3% 54,000 → 55,800 on the projections basis

Growing, and only partly exposed

The BLS expects +3.3% more of these jobs by 2034, and at 56/100 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.

~7,800 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.

OrderlyAttendantWard AideTransporterWard HelperCart AttendantPatient EscortPatient SitterRadiology AideTransport AideWard AssistantWard AttendantMedical OrderlyHospital OrderlyPatient ObserverSecurity OrderlySurgical OrderlyHospital CorpsmanRadiology OrderlyInstitutional AideNew Patient EscortInfirmary AttendantMedical TransporterOperating Room Aide

Score — 56/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (19/20). Weakest point: liability shield (3/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 15 + 19 + 3 + 11 + 8 = 56. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 15/20

Tasks largely resist digitisation A two-person lateral transfer of a 300-pound sedated patient off a gurney, a manual reposition to prevent pressure ulcers, and a terminal clean of an isolation room are physical acts no software performs, which is why this sits at 15 rather than 18 — the AGV linen cart, the automated transport-ticket queue, and the bed-status board have already taken the fetching-and-dispatching slice of the shift.

Embodiment 19/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments The work happens in occupied patient rooms, ORs, morgues and elevators, with wet floors, C. diff precautions, combative or confused patients, and lifting loads that put orderlies among the highest musculoskeletal-injury rates in any US industry; 19 rather than 20 only because some of the shift is pushing carts down predictable corridors.

Liability shield 3/20

No licence, no signature requirement No state licence gates this job — most hospitals require a high school diploma, CPR, and in-house lift and bloodborne-pathogen training, and when a patient is dropped during a transfer the claim runs against the hospital and the supervising RN who ordered the move, so the 3 reflects only that a documented competency checklist exists at all.

Trust premium 11/20

Some relationship component Being the person who moves a frightened patient to imaging or handles a body for the family means patients and nurses ask for the orderly they know, and charge nurses protect the ones who can turn a room fast — but you are assigned by the dispatch queue, not chosen, and float across units, which caps this at 11 instead of the mid-teens.

Judgment & accountability 8/20

Meaningful discretion Lift protocols, isolation precautions and transport orders are written down and you follow them; the 8 is for the calls that are genuinely yours — refusing an unsafe solo transfer, spotting that a patient has gone gray or unresponsive mid-transport and stopping to call it in, deciding a confused patient shouldn't be left on a gurney unattended.

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

How to future-proof this job

Training paths for your skill gaps: edX — performance measurement and evaluation free to audit · Coursera — teaching and instructional design, audit free free to audit · Learning How to Learn — the most-taken course on Coursera, and free free to audit · Coursera — negotiation, influence and persuasion courses free to audit

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.

Childcare Workers SAFE · 71/100 · you already have ~56% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Monitoring, Instructing, Learning Strategies, Persuasion

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 70/100 — SAFE.

6 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening task resistance +2

    Task-mix shift as AGVs and tube systems absorb specimen and linen runs: what remains is hands-on repositioning, early-mobility ambulation protocols, and fall-risk observation. Recognizable marker would be hospitals formally reassigning orderlies to mobility-technician or 1:1 observation duty rather than cutting headcount

  • already happening judgment accountability +2

    Hospital pressure-injury and fall metrics are CMS penalty-linked; if repositioning-turn documentation becomes an auditable, individually-attributed entry in the EHR (as some systems already do with turn-timer sensors), the role owns a consequential, named call

  • already happening trust premium +2

    Private-duty and concierge patient-sitter/companion market where families pay directly for a named human to stay with a frail or dementia patient during hospitalization — already a paid service in some markets and explicitly not substitutable by monitoring cameras

  • plausible judgment accountability +3

    Joint Commission or CMS Conditions of Participation naming the transporting or repositioning staff member as an accountable reporter in fall, pressure-injury (HAPI), and deterioration escalation pathways — e.g. a documented handoff signature required before a patient leaves a unit for imaging, and inclusion of transport staff in rapid-response activation criteria

  • plausible liability shield +3

    State-level extension of nurse-aide certification (42 CFR 483.152-style training and registry, currently mandated in long-term care) to acute-care transport and handling staff, with registry-recorded abuse/neglect findings attaching to the individual. This creates a credential and personal record, not personal malpractice liability

  • plausible task resistance +2

    State safe-patient-handling laws (already in ~11 states: WA, NY, CA AB 1136, NJ, MN) being extended to require a dedicated two-person lift/mobility team for any transfer of a patient above a weight or dependency threshold — this converts transfers from 'whoever is free' into a staffed function that dispatch software cannot thin out, and shifts the remaining shift toward the mobility/handling tier rather than errand-running

The limit. Liability shield has a hard low ceiling: no US jurisdiction licenses orderlies as independent practitioners and none is proposing to, so signature authority and personal malpractice exposure are not realistic routes. Embodiment is already near maximum and cannot rise. The dominant threat here is headcount thinning through staffing software, which staffing-ratio and lift-team mandates address directly while credentialing does not.

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 120 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 4,970 $45,850 +20%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 1,890 $49,760 +30%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 1,770 $39,640 +4%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 1,740 $43,570 +14%
Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH 1,330 $39,800 +4%
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA 1,280 $37,410 -2%
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL 1,210 $35,770 -7%
Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD 960 $37,760 -1%

Best paid

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 480 $69,870 +82%
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 300 $65,790 +72%
Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA 40 $63,780 +67%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $38,290. 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 56. 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.