Skip to content
man bot
Compare

Plant and machine operators, and assemblers · code 8311

Locomotive engine drivers

Some metro lines already drive themselves. Main-line trains, freight and mines still have a driver.

Radio contact with crews and controllers is mostly out of AI's reach. Driving the train and watching for hazards and signals it barely touches.

What they actually do (and what else they get called)

Locomotive engine drivers drive, or assist in driving, locomotive engines to transport passengers and freight. Tasks include - (a) driving or assisting in driving a steam, electric or diesel-electric locomotive engine; (b) driving an underground or elevated passenger train; (c) driving a locomotive to haul carriages underground or on the surface of a mine or quarry; (d) watching for track hazards and observing signals and indicator gauges; (e) operating communications systems to communicate with train crews and traffic controllers to ensure safe operation and scheduling of trains. Examples of the occupations classified here: - Locomotive driver - Metropolitan railway driver - Train driver Some related occupations classified elsewhere: - Tram driver - 8331 Notes Drivers of vehicles that operate on fixed rail systems that are separated from public roadways are classified in Unit Group 8311: Locomotive Engine Drivers. Drivers of vehicles for passenger transportation on fixed rails that are incorporated in the public roadway are classified in Unit Group 8331: Bus and Tram Drivers.

  • train driver

Job titles from the EU's ESCO list. Search for any of them on the jobs page and you'll end up here.

80 / 100

Strongly holds up against AI

Most of this job still needs an actual human. AI would mostly be making the tea.

Not the odds you keep your job. It's how much of the everyday work still needs a person, out of 100.

← Robot's turf Human's turf →

The ILO's official verdict: Not Exposed

143 of 427 for holding up against AI

Why this score?

The ILO rated each of this job's 5 tasks for how much of it AI could do. They average 19.9 out of 100, so it holds up at 100 − 19.9 = 80.1.

That's the whole sum. No black box, no secret sauce: you can check it against the ILO's study. ILO group “Not Exposed”: None of this job's tasks scored high enough to count.

from the source Working Paper 140, Generative AI and Jobs 2025 index data 0.8-observed-use

Pinch of salt: this number is probably too rosy

It only asks what AI software could do, and this job is 72 out of 100 hands-on. A chatbot can't do that part. A robot might, one day, and nobody measures how close that is.

Man v Bot · compare

Who holds up better?

Locomotive engine drivers 80

v

Go on, try your partner's job. Or your sibling's. We won't tell.

Man v Bot

Where the bot helps, and where the human wins

Bot

What AI takes

The routine stuff. You may not miss it.

  • Digital signalling and in-cab systems.
  • Communication with control centres.
  • Timetabling and route planning.

Man

What people still do better

Judgement, trust and skilled hands. Hard to download.

  • Driving and watching for hazards.
  • Responding when something goes wrong.
  • Taking responsibility for the train and passengers.

Both

What's arriving

New work that only exists because the AI does.

  • Supervising automated trains.
  • Digital signalling systems.
  • Electric and battery trains.

Written by a human, from the ILO's task ratings below. Yes, we see the irony. Read it as one person's take.

Meet your two rivals

They're not the same machine. AI software can only reach the parts of a job done on a screen or in words. A chatbot can't climb a ladder. A robot might, one day, if it doesn't fall off.

The AI

Lives in a screen. Never had to fix a boiler.

Threat level: Medium

38 could do without you

It could take over some of the work, and help with more. It could help with 53 of 100.

The robot

The wildcard. Has hands, still working out stairs.

How much it matters here: Higher

72 how hands-on

Most of this job needs hands, a body or turning up. That's robot territory, and nobody measures how far robots have got well enough to give you a number. We won't make one up.

So could a robot do the physical part?

More fine handwork, and more time in cramped or awkward spots, than a typical hands-on job. That is exactly what machines find hardest: they do best in tidy, predictable places.

Robots hate fiddly work in awkward spaces. On that measure, this job scores 43 out of 100. The higher it is, the longer the robot waits.

72 How
hands-on
43 How fiddly
and cramped

Kind of hands-on work Hands-on, fiddly work in tight spaces

The small print

They aren't a robot score, and nothing on this page is. Nobody measures how far robots have got well enough to put a number on it. These are the closest thing we have: how hands-on the job is, and how much fiddly, cramped work it takes, which is what Frey and Osborne found hardest for machines.

From O*NET, averaged across 7 US jobs , so treat it as rough.

finger skill 38.7 · hand skill 42.2 · cramped spaces 46.7 · averaged · rule: hands-on 50+ · fiddly 39.4+

estimated O*NET 31.0 BLS occupational crosswalk chain ISCO-08 to 2010 SOC (Aug 2012, rev. Jun 2015); 2010 to 2018 SOC (Nov 2017); O*NET-SOC 2019 taxonomy data 0.8-observed-use measures chosen by Frey & Osborne (2017) · the grouping is a sorting, not a measurement

The job, task by task

Every job is really a bundle of tasks. Here's this one unpacked, with how much of each AI could do, out of 100. The score is the average, and averages can hide a lot.

AI's favourite task here scores 34, against an average of 20. The bigger the gap, the more lopsided the job: some of it wide open to AI, some of it barely touched.

  1. 34

    Operating communications systems to communicate with train crews and traffic controllers to ensure safe operation and scheduling of trains.

    Low
  2. 17

    Watching for track hazards, observing signals and indicator gauges

    Very Low
  3. 17

    Driving or assisting in driving a steam, electric or diesel-electric locomotive engine

    Very Low
  4. 16

    Driving a locomotive to haul carriages underground or on the surface of a mine or quarry

    Very Low
  5. 16

    Driving an underground or elevated passenger train

    Very Low

5 tasks · the High to Very Low labels are the ILO's

from the source Working Paper 140, Generative AI and Jobs 2025 index data 0.8-observed-use

Sidekick or replacement?

A tool that makes you faster is a very different thing from one that does the task while you watch. Jobs and Skills Australia measured the two separately, which is handy.

AI helps you
53
AI does it for you
38

Sidekick wins, by 15 points.

How good a match is this?

One Australian job matches this one closely, so this is about as reliable as it gets here.

estimated Our Gen AI Transition (Gen AI Capacity Study) September 2025 detailed data release data 0.8-observed-use matched to Australian jobs 7313

Meanwhile, in real life…

Everything else here is about what AI could do. This is what people actually did. When they asked Claude for help with this kind of work, did they hand the whole task over, or roll their sleeves up and work through it together?

Tiny sample alert This job makes up 0.03% of all the conversations: a tiny slice, mostly the paperwork rather than the work. People using AI for a job isn't the same as AI being able to do it.

Out of every 100 conversations

37
63

worked through it together handed it over

The small print

Anthropic publishes this about its own product, and it doesn't feed into any score here. These are people who use Claude, not workers in general, so little use here doesn't mean AI can't reach the job.

The data is sorted by US job, and this one matches 3 of them. We've combined them, counting each by how often it comes up in the conversations, so the busiest one counts most.

These two add up to 100. The bars elsewhere on the page don't, because each is scored on its own, so we don't put them side by side.

observed use Anthropic Economic Index release 2026-06-26, period beginning 2026-05-01 data 0.8-observed-use 2026-05-01 · Anthropic, about its own product

So, should train drivers be worried?

Short answer: not really. Put the kettle on.

A robotics question more than an AI one. Communicating with control is the most exposed task, rated Low; driving and watching for hazards rate Very Low. Driverless trains run on some closed metro systems, and signalling is going digital, but most railways still need drivers.

Worth remembering: we score tasks, not jobs. When AI takes on a task, the job usually reshuffles around it rather than vanishing.

Where this job could lead

None of the new jobs we've written up start from here yet. Could be you're the first. See the jobs AI is creating →

How are the neighbours doing?

There are 39 jobs in the “Plant and machine operators, and assemblers” family, averaging 80. This one is below the family average.

Pit this against any other job →