← Risk register SOC 47-2171 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Reinforcing Iron and Rebar Workers

13,800 US workers · median $58,970/yr · Construction

EXPOSED

Cutting, bending, placing and tying rebar per engineered drawings is heavy, dirty, outdoor work on uneven decks and in footings — language AI cannot touch it, and general-purpose robots are nowhere near it. The real pressure is mechanization inside the trade: shop-prefabricated rebar cages, CNC bending lines, and rebar-tying robots like TyBot on flat bridge decks and slabs eat the most repetitive hours. No license shields the job and the engineer, not the placer, signs the drawings, so protection comes almost entirely from the body and the jobsite.

10-year outlook: Demand tracks infrastructure spending and stays real, but prefabrication and deck-tying robots shift hours from repetitive slab tying toward congested field fitting, rigging, and PT work — the crews shrink and the skill mix rises.

US employment, 2019–2025-26.9%
18,87013,800 workers

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

Median pay $49,100 → $58,970 -3.9% in real terms (nominal +20.1%, 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

+4.6%

Percentage only. The projection counts a different population from the 13,800 above — it includes self-employed workers, which for this occupation is most of them, so the two headcounts are not comparable.

Growing, and only partly exposed

The BLS expects +4.6% more of these jobs by 2034, and at 51/100 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.

~1,500 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.

RodmanLaborerRodbusterIronworkerRebar TierRod BusterSteel TierIron WorkerRebar BenderRebar WorkerIron InstallerConcrete BusterConcrete WorkerRebar RodbusterField IronworkerRebar FabricatorSteel Rod BusterIronworker WelderConcrete Rod BusterJourneyman IronworkerReinforced IronworkerReinforcing Rod LayerStructural IronworkerReinforcing Iron Worker

Score — 51/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (18/20). Weakest point: liability shield (4/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 17 + 18 + 4 + 5 + 7 = 51. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 17/20

Tasks largely resist digitisation Wiring #8 bar into a column cage at height, walking mats on a mud footing, and hand-bending hooks to fit a congested beam-column joint are motion problems no model solves — the 17 rather than 20 reflects that flat-slab and bridge-deck tying, plus shop cutting and bending lists, are already being done by CNC lines and gantry-mounted tying robots.

Embodiment 18/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments You carry and place bar in trenches, on suspended decks and in rain, kneeling on grade all shift with tying tools and cutters, at genuine risk of impalement and struck-by injury — an 18 rather than 20 only because prefabricated cages set by crane shift a slice of the work into a controlled shop.

Liability shield 4/20

No licence, no signature requirement No state license or certification is required to place rebar; OSHA 1926.701 impalement rules and the inspector's checklist bind the contractor, and the EOR's stamp on the placing drawings carries the design liability, leaving you with the 4 points that come from being the person the inspector watches tie the lap splice.

Trust premium 5/20

Anonymous artifact production Your work is buried in concrete within days and no one who pays for the building knows your name; the 5 comes from foremen and superintendents rehiring specific rodbusters who can read a bar list and keep pace with the pour schedule, which is crew reputation, not client relationship.

Judgment & accountability 7/20

Meaningful discretion Bar sizes, spacing, lap lengths and cover are all dimensioned on the placing drawings, so the 7 covers the real calls you make in the field — how to sequence congested mats, where to add ties and chairs so the cage doesn't shift under the pour, and when a conflict on the drawing has to go back to the engineer rather than be fudged.

Confidence: medium · reviewed 2026-08-11 · how scoring works · 1 deployment report on file

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, unionization

How to future-proof this job

Training paths for your skill gaps: Coursera — engineering and procurement courses, auditable without paying free to audit · Coursera — negotiation, influence and persuasion courses free to audit · MIT OpenCourseWare — full course materials across every department, free free · Khan Academy — mathematics, arithmetic through calculus free · Apprenticeship.gov — electrical, HVAC, plumbing and fitting programs that pay while you learn paid to train · Coursera — customer service and client-facing skill courses free to audit · Coursera — active listening and communication skills free to audit · Coursera — project coordination and cross-team delivery 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.

Brickmasons and Blockmasons SAFE · 68/100 · you already have ~88% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Equipment Selection, Persuasion, Active Learning, Mathematics

Glaziers EXPOSED · 65/100 · you already have ~88% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Installation, Service Orientation

Roofers SAFE · 70/100 · you already have ~87% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Installation, Active Listening, Coordination

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 65/100, still EXPOSED.

4 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening judgment accountability +4

    Task-mix shift as TyBot-class machines and shop-prefab cages absorb flat-deck tying and straight-bar work: what remains is congested column/beam joints, seismic hooks and confinement details, splice-length and clearance calls in the field, and RFI-triggering conflicts between rebar and embeds/post-tension ducts. The remaining role is closer to a field detailer/foreman owning pour-stop decisions under time pressure. Watch for BLS/industry reclassification of hours toward supervisory placement.

  • already happening task resistance +2

    Growth in seismic retrofit, bridge rehabilitation and nuclear/heavy-industrial work where placement is in existing congested structures — environments where prefab cages and gantry-mounted tying robots cannot be deployed. Federal IIJA bridge rehab funding already shifts the mix this way.

  • plausible liability shield +5

    Adoption of a mandatory certified rebar-installer credential tied to inspection sign-off — the model already exists in ACI/CRSI certification and in special-inspection regimes: IBC Chapter 17 requires special inspection of reinforcing steel placement, and some jurisdictions (e.g. NYC DOB's licensed/certified trade requirements, California DSA school projects) already demand certified personnel. If a state or model code amendment required a certified ironworker of record to sign a rebar placement affidavit before concrete pour, personal accountability attaches to the placer rather than only the engineer.

  • plausible judgment accountability +3

    If OSHA or a state plan tightens impalement-hazard and rebar-cage stability rules (1926.701(b) enforcement, cage bracing/lift-plan requirements after cage-collapse fatalities), a designated competent person for rebar cage erection would own consequential stability calls in writing.

The limit. No plausible route to trust premium: concrete buyers specify a code-compliant pour, not a human-tied one, and the finished work is buried. Embodiment is already near ceiling and can only fall as robotic tying widens beyond flat decks; the liability lever is the only one that meaningfully changes the profile, and it depends on code bodies choosing to place accountability at the trade rather than the engineer of record.

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 25 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

Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 1,500 $51,860 -12%
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 960 $101,890 +73%
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 760 $50,910 -14%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 640 $62,990 +7%
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 520 $59,820 +1%
Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX 330 $50,270 -15%
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL 300 $48,570 -18%
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 280 $61,130 +4%

Best paid

Las Vegas-Henderson-North Las Vegas, NV 270 $102,080 +73%
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 960 $101,890 +73%
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA 220 $95,670 +62%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $58,970. 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

The score above is about what the work exposes. This is reporting about real deployments in this occupation — the difference between "could be automated" and "somebody automated it."

1 of 1 reported case, with sources

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.