← Risk register SOC 43-9022 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Word Processors and Typists

35,010 US workers · median $49,280/yr · Office

COOKED

The core of this job — keying text from drafts or dictation, formatting reports and correspondence, applying templates and styles, proofreading for spelling and grammar — is precisely what speech-to-text and generative models already do at production quality and near-zero marginal cost. There is no licensure, no physical component beyond sitting at a keyboard, and no client who is paying for this specific person's presence. Employment has already fallen by roughly 90% from its 1990s peak, and the remaining 35,000 jobs are largely in legal, medical, and government offices where formatting rules and records handling are still tolerated as human work.

10-year outlook: By 2035 this SOC code will likely be a rounding error, with the surviving work absorbed into administrative assistant, records clerk, and transcript-verification roles.

US employment, 2019–2025-26.2%
47,46035,010 workers

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

Median pay $40,340 → $49,280 -2.3% in real terms (nominal +22.2%, 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

-36.1% 40,000 → 25,600 on the projections basis

Exposed, and shrinking

Both signals point the same way: the tasks are largely automatable and the BLS projects -36.1% 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.

~2,200 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.

TypistAddresserNotereaderScript GirlTranscriberClerk TypistLegal TypistOffice ClerkStenographerPolicy TypistScript WorkerMedical TypistStencil TypistWord ProcessorBordereau ClerkClerk SpecialistContinuity ClerkData TranscriberOffice AssistantOffice AssociateTranscriptionistDictaphone TypistEdiphone OperatorOffice Technician

Score — 8/100 resistance

Holding it up: task resistance (2/20). Weakest point: liability shield (0/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 2 + 2 + 0 + 2 + 2 = 8. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 2/20

Core tasks are already automatable Transcribing dictation, keying text into templates, applying styles and running spell-check are tasks where Whisper-class ASR and off-the-shelf document automation already hit or beat human accuracy per page, which is why this sits at 2 rather than 7 — even the residual work of merging revisions and building tables of contents is native software functionality, not a human judgment gap.

Embodiment 2/20

Fully desk- and screen-based Sitting at a workstation with a keyboard, headset, and occasionally a scanner or copier is the whole physical footprint; the 2 rather than 0 acknowledges retrieving paper files and stuffing envelopes in legal and clinical offices, not any task requiring hands in an uncontrolled space.

Liability shield 0/20

No licence, no signature requirement There is no state licence, no certification board, and no signature line — a typo in a deposition transcript or discharge summary comes back on the attorney or clinician who signed it, and employers can and do route the same work to an offshore vendor or an ASR pipeline with no credentialing barrier.

Trust premium 2/20

Anonymous artifact production The output is a clean document that carries the author's name, not yours; the 2 reflects that long-tenured typists in a small law or clinic office get kept for knowing the firm's house style and where the old files are, which is institutional memory rather than a relationship a client is paying to preserve.

Judgment & accountability 2/20

Executes defined procedures on defined inputs Deciding whether an inaudible passage gets bracketed, which template applies to a motion, or whether to query the dictator on an ambiguous drug name is real but bounded discretion inside a style manual, and every substantive call escalates to the originating attorney or physician — that keeps it at 2 rather than 7.

This occupation has already been through one. Headcount fell 46.3% between 2017 and 2025 — 65,200 to 35,010 — while the median wage held roughly flat in real terms ( -4.9% after inflation). A job being commoditised usually loses pay along with headcount. One that shrinks by half while pay holds is leaving a specialist core behind, and the score above was assigned from the occupation title without sight of that history — so it may be describing the job this used to be rather than the people still doing it. Why this is a known limit.

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

How to future-proof this job

Training paths for your skill gaps: Coursera — active listening and communication skills free to audit · Coursera — critical thinking and logic, audit free free to audit · Coursera — teaching and instructional design, audit 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.

Court Reporters and Simultaneous Captioners EXPOSED · 34/100 · you already have ~79% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Active Listening

Tax Examiners and Collectors, and Revenue Agents EXPOSED · 34/100 · you already have ~51% of the skill profile

Skills to close: Critical Thinking, Instructing, 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 24/100, still COOKED.

5 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening task resistance +3

    Task-mix shift within the surviving legal/medical/court niche: if ASR handles the raw keying, the remaining work concentrates in certified transcript preparation to court-specific format (e.g., federal court transcript format rules, AAERT CET-style verbatim standards), redaction of PII/PHI under HIPAA and FRCP 5.2, and speaker attribution in multi-party audio — tasks where error is consequential and current ASR degrades on crosstalk and accents. This is a genuine two-tier occupation; the judgment tier is small but real.

  • already happening trust premium +3

    Buyer-side rules against sending sensitive audio to cloud AI — classified, grand jury, sealed family-court, or attorney-client material handled under protective order — sustaining a small paid-for-human-only segment; visible today in government contracts specifying US-person, cleared transcriptionists.

  • plausible liability shield +4

    Court rules or state statutes requiring that a transcript entered into the record be certified by a human transcriptionist/reporter attesting to accuracy — already the norm for court reporters (many states bar AI-only certified transcripts), and could be extended by judicial council rule to transcript-prep staff handling recorded proceedings (as in states using electronic recording plus certified transcribers).

  • plausible liability shield +3

    Health-system or state rules requiring a credentialed medical transcriptionist/editor (AHDI CHDS/RHDS) to review and sign off on AI-drafted clinical documentation before it enters the legal medical record, driven by malpractice-insurer requirements after documented ambient-scribe hallucination incidents (Whisper hallucination findings in clinical audio, 2024).

  • plausible judgment accountability +3

    Role redefinition to AI-output verifier of record: if the transcriptionist is named as the person attesting to accuracy of an AI-generated transcript or clinical note, they own the call on ambiguous audio and on what gets redacted, with discoverable consequences.

The limit. Even with every lever, this tops out in the low 20s and only for the fraction of the 35,010 sitting in courts, hospitals, and cleared government work. The generic office typist has no route; the credentialed niche is a different job with a different title, and headcount there is already small and shrinking.

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 81 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 8,370 $52,290 +6%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 6,830 $57,670 +17%
San Juan-Bayamon-Caguas, PR 1,330 $28,940 -41%
Buffalo-Cheektowaga, NY 1,300 $47,040 -5%
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 880 $49,280 +0%
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 840 $79,430 +61%
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY 830 $46,550 -6%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 690 $47,250 -4%

Best paid

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 840 $79,430 +61%
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 100 $64,280 +30%
Worcester, MA 90 $59,110 +20%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $49,280. 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 8. 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.