← Risk register SOC 51-7099 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Woodworkers, All Other

5,490 US workers · median $44,530/yr · Production

EXPOSED

This catch-all woodworking title covers shop hands who set up and run saws, routers, sanders and joinery equipment, read cut lists and blueprints, fit and glue assemblies, and inspect for grain defects and tolerance — work language models cannot touch directly. The real pressure is not chatbots but CNC machining centers, automated nesting/optimization software, and panel-processing lines that absorb the layout, cutting, and repetitive shaping tasks, shrinking headcount per unit of output. What persists is hand-fitting, defect judgment on natural material, custom one-off and repair work, and machine setup/troubleshooting in small shops where CNC capital doesn't pencil out.

10-year outlook: Employment in this small residual category keeps drifting down as CNC and panel lines consolidate volume work, while custom, restoration, and installation-adjacent woodworkers hold steady or command higher rates.

US employment, 2019–2025-18.1%
6,7005,490 workers

Most of this decline happened after 2021 — it is not the pandemic dip.

Median pay $33,110 → $44,530 +7.6% in real terms (nominal +34.5%, 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

-4.4%

Percentage only. The projection counts a different population from the 5,490 above — it includes self-employed workers, which for this occupation is most of them, so the two headcounts are not comparable.

Exposed, and shrinking

Both signals point the same way: the tasks are largely automatable and the BLS projects -4.4% by 2034. This is the case where the score and the forecast agree, and it is the one worth taking seriously.

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.

~1,800 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.

DyerShaperTankerPipe MakerSled MakerHand CarverPlaner HandPole FramerTank CooperWood CarverPatternmakerSash StickerTight CooperTip InserterVeneer DrierVeneer TaperBelly BuilderLayout WorkerStock CheckerTimber FramerVeneer MarkerBoat Oar MakerPattern MarkerShowcase Maker

This is a catch-all code, not a single job

The BLS uses Woodworkers, All Other for work that doesn't fit any named occupation, so it covers roles that have little in common with each other. Two consequences worth knowing before you read anything below:

If a more specific occupation on the register describes what you actually do, that page is the one to trust.

Score — 44/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (16/20). Weakest point: liability shield (2/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 13 + 16 + 2 + 6 + 7 = 44. · 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 At 13 the split is real: nesting software and a 5-axis CNC will chew through the sheet-goods layout, dadoes and repeat profiles you now do on the table saw and shaper, but reading tearout risk in figured maple, shimming a warped panel flat, coping a joint that came out proud, and re-setting a jig for a one-off replacement part still take a person at the bench — that keeps it above the mixed midpoint without reaching the untouchable band.

Embodiment 16/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments 16 reflects that nothing in this job happens away from the material — you are muscling 4x8 sheets and rough lumber onto machine tables, standing at a spraying or sanding station in dust and noise, feeling for glue squeeze-out and flush surfaces by hand, and working around unguarded blades and cutterheads; it stops short of 20 only because it is a shop floor you control rather than a roof, trench or customer's crawlspace.

Liability shield 2/20

No licence, no signature requirement 2 is right because no state licenses woodworkers: you may hold an OSHA 10 card or forklift and lockout/tagout training, but those are employer requirements, and when a cabinet fails or a dimension is out of tolerance the shop's warranty and the contractor's specification absorb it, not your personal credential.

Trust premium 6/20

Some relationship component A 6 fits the shop hand whose output leaves on a truck under the company's name — but the score is not lower because in a 6-person custom shop the owner and repeat clients ask for the person who did last year's stair parts or knows how to match an existing finish, so some of the work follows you rather than the shop.

Judgment & accountability 7/20

Meaningful discretion 7 acknowledges you make live calls the cut list doesn't cover — reject this board for a knot near a joint line, flip it for grain match, adjust feed rate when the router starts burning, decide a glue-up is close enough to sand out — but you are working to prints, tolerances and a foreman's sign-off, so the ambiguous consequential decisions about design, structure and price are made above you.

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, physical-presence

How to future-proof this job

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 56/100, still EXPOSED.

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

    Task-mix shift is real here: as CNC nesting and panel lines absorb cut lists and repetitive shaping, the residual job concentrates on hand-fitting, grain/defect calls on non-uniform stock, and setup/troubleshooting of finicky tooling. Watch for shop job postings retitled toward 'CNC setup/finish carpenter' with cut-list work dropped from the duty list.

  • plausible trust premium +3

    Continued expansion of documented-provenance buying: 'handmade' claims policed the way FTC 'Made in USA' is, or a certification mark (e.g., a Furniture Society or guild 'hand-built' label) that lets makers charge for verified human construction. Bespoke furniture and instrument markets already sustain this; the lever is whether the label becomes checkable rather than marketing.

  • plausible judgment accountability +3

    Shops that move into structural/architectural work take on real sign-off: glue-lam and engineered timber fabrication under APA/AITC quality-control programs requires a named qualified person to accept or reject laminations and bondline tests. A woodworker whose defect calls are the record for a load-bearing component owns a consequential call.

  • plausible embodiment +2

    Growth in the repair/restoration and retrofit share of work (historic millwork replication, furniture repair, architectural salvage) which is inherently one-off, in-situ, and unmeasurable in advance — supported by expanded Historic Tax Credit or state preservation grant programs requiring in-kind wood replication.

  • unlikely liability shield +2

    Narrow route only: fire-rated door and assembly fabrication under NFPA 80 / UL labeling requires an authorized fabricator and traceable inspection records; if labeling schemes tighten to require an individually qualified inspector rather than a facility license, a small slice of this SOC gains a named signer. This covers a minority of shops and would not lift the occupation broadly.

The limit. The binding constraint is capital, not capability or law — CNC and panel-processing lines cut headcount per unit whether or not any human judgment persists. Levers here protect the character of the remaining work, not its volume; there is no licensure body for woodworking and none is being organized.

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 15 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

Eugene-Springfield, OR 150 $44,760 +1%
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA 150 $49,240 +11%
Morristown, TN 120 $30,510 -31%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 110 $46,360 +4%
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 100 $46,260 +4%
Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL 90 $37,470 -16%
Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA 70 $46,390 +4%
Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD 60 $43,310 -3%

Best paid

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 30 $64,260 +44%
Oklahoma City, OK 50 $56,470 +27%
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA 150 $49,240 +11%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $44,530. 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 44. 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.