Where you work, if they have not made the investments yet to replace them it is because the robots would be too expensive, inflexible (can't be fired). It is a simple cost savings equation. Or your company is inefficient.
And in the plant that I used to work in, while technicians performed repetitive tasks most of the time, it is really when the machine had trouble that they would become very valuable: troubleshooting, performing repairs on the spot, etc. When a task was purely repetitive a robot or machine was there already to do it. It is actually expensive to have humans do repetitive tasks because they are not as fast and get hurt which cost a lot of money.
While I have no doubt that many jobs will be replaced in coming years this is not a new phenomenon as automation has been happening for decades. The question is how fast can robot become cheaper and as multi-tasking, smart as regular humans? I think that is a long way out.
For example, a plane is already able to take-off, travel and land on its own without a pilot intervention since many years. Why do we still have two guys sitting in the cockpit? Maybe that there is a lot of low hanging fruits in the transportation industry with automated cars and trucks but, looking at what happened with airplanes or even trains (the thing drives on rails!), I am not so sure about timing.