![\"UBTECH](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/1784729081_958_0x0.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
UBTECH robot working at Zeekr’s intelligent factory in China.<\/p>\n
VCG via Getty Images<\/p>\n
Are humanoid robots the future of factory workforces?<\/p>\n
We\u2019ve all seen the billions investors are pouring into humanoid robots. I\u2019m currently tracking about $300 billion<\/a> in ecosystem spending, including NEURA Robotics, which just raised $1.4 billion, Figure, Apptronik, and a brand-new European unicorn \u2013 billion-dollar startup \u2013 that I\u2019ll be writing exclusively about tomorrow morning. Most of these robots, and others from top Chinese manufacturers like Agibot, UBtech, and Unitree are already working in factories, generally in demonstration projects, but not always. Agibot\u2019s G2 is working on a live production line<\/a>, something the company recently live-streamed<\/a>. <\/p>\n We\u2019ve even seen the first humanoid robot strike<\/a> already: a Hyundai strike at least partially motivated by the fear of humanoid robots taking human jobs. <\/p>\n So here\u2019s the big question: are we looking at the future of manufacturing, or is this all just another flash-in-the-pan tech hype cycle?<\/p>\n I put that to Jeff Burnstein, who has spent more than four decades at the Association for Advancing Automation and the last 19 as its president. He has watched the industry go from the first industrial robot arms to the AI-driven machines being built today. <\/p>\n He\u2019s neither breathless nor totally dismissive.<\/p>\n “I think we\u2019re heavy in the hype cycle,” Burnstein told me. \u201cWe haven\u2019t proven anything other than some production \u2026 the only humanoid in production in the U.S. that I\u2019m aware of is an Agility robot in a GXO Logistics plant.\u201d<\/p>\n But he\u2019s also aware of the astonishing pace of innovation. In just a few years, we\u2019ve gone from robots with claws to robots that can fry eggs and tape wires<\/a> together.<\/p>\n \u201cAI is changing this very rapidly,\u201d he adds. \u201cI understand that. The intelligence of these robots could be much better much sooner than I think. The dexterity could be much better much sooner.\u201d<\/p>\n The reality check<\/p>\n Most of what\u2019s going on with humanoid robots in factories are pilot projects. And the pilots, Burnstein says, are landing at maybe 20% to 50% effectiveness. “That’s not enough. Customers need 99-point-whatever in order to be certain of using these technologies.”<\/p>\n (Interestingly, the UK startup Humanoid is currently achieving roughly 80% of human speed<\/a> in some manual tasks, and is targeting 100% and higher.)<\/p>\n The point is that manufacturers don\u2019t actually care whether a robot has two legs and a face. Or wheels, for that matter.<\/p>\n “What I hear from customers is, ‘Look, we need a solution. If this is a better solution than existing robots or no robot, we\u2019re good,'” Burnstein said. “We just need things that work, things that are proven reliable, affordable.” <\/p>\n The single biggest gate on adoption? It\u2019s not intelligence or dexterity, though both are needed. It’s safety. <\/p>\n There is no humanoid robot safety standard yet, and until there is, Burnstein doesn\u2019t see fast growth. “I don\u2019t think insurers are going to be happy. I don\u2019t think OSHA will be happy.” Most if not all working humanoid robots are kept away from people with gates or fences. And one early accident with a humanoid could freeze the whole market.<\/p>\n Traditional industrial robots \u2014 massive, quick, purpose-built, accurate to many nines \u2014 already do enormous amounts of work, and that will keep growing. Humanoids will show up in factories, warehouses, logistics, farms, and homes. But we probably won\u2019t see a factory with 10,000 humanoids, Burnstein says. There will be some; the question is how many.<\/p>\n The robots and jobs question, inverted<\/p>\n Which brings up the jobs question, of course.<\/p>\n The narrative I\u2019ve been using on my Next with John Koetsier podcast<\/a> is that AI seems to be coming for the white-collar jobs and robots are coming for the blue-collar ones. And maybe we all end up on some kind of universal basic income.<\/p>\n Burnstein has been answering some version of the robots-and-jobs question since 1983, and his data cuts the other way.<\/p>\n A3 has tracked robot sales against U.S. employment for more than three decades. The pattern: when robot sales go up, unemployment goes down. When robot sales fall, unemployment rises. The logic is straightforward: companies that automate become more productive, win more business, hire more people. <\/p>\n The real job killer, Burnstein says, isn’t the robot. <\/p>\n It’s losing the ability to compete.<\/p>\n He frames the choice companies faced in the 1980s in three words: automate, emigrate, or evaporate. Many of them chased cheap labor overseas and evaporated anyway. Meanwhile there are nearly 500,000 unfilled manufacturing jobs today, a number projected to hit 1.9 million by 2033, according to Burnstein. <\/p>\n The problem isn\u2019t a shortage of work. It\u2019s that fewer people want to walk 10 miles a day hauling boxes in a warehouse. The jobs shift toward overseeing, installing, and maintaining the machines, in the same way that jobs such as “SEO specialist” or “iPhone app developer,” didn’t exist a generation ago.<\/p>\n Geopolitics enters the humanoid robot conversation<\/p>\n If there’s an urgent thread here, it’s national strategy. <\/p>\n