Skip to content
man bot
Compare

Technicians and associate professionals · code 3141

Life science technicians (excluding medical)

AI can model the data. Growing the cultures is still careful lab work.

AI could take a fair chunk of three of the thirteen tasks, including modelling data and keeping databases. Setting up and running lab equipment it barely touches.

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

Life science technicians (excluding medical) provide technical support to life science professionals undertaking research, analysis and testing of living organisms, and development and application of products and processes resulting from research in areas such as natural resource management, environmental protection, plant and animal biology, microbiology, and cell and molecular biology. Tasks include - (a) assisting in designing, setting up and conducting experiments; (b) setting up, calibrating, operating and maintaining laboratory instruments and equipment; (c) collecting and preparing specimens and samples, chemical solutions and slides and growing cultures for use in experiments; (d) performing routine field and laboratory tests; (e) monitoring experiments to ensure adherence to correct laboratory quality control procedures and health and safety guidelines; (f) making observations of tests and analysing, calculating, recording and reporting test results using appropriate scientific methods; (g) preserving, classifying and cataloguing specimens and samples; (h) keeping detailed logs of worked performed; (i) using computers to develop models and analyse data; (j) using complex and high-powered equipment to perform work; (k) participating in the research, development and manufacture of products and processes; (l) ordering and stocking laboratory supplies; (m) maintaining relevant databases. Examples of the occupations classified here: - Bacteriology technician - Biochemistry technician - Herbarium technician - Pharmacology technician - Serology technician - Tissue culture technician - Zoology technician Some related occupations classified elsewhere: - Forensic science technician - 3119 - Medical laboratory technician - 3212 - Pathology laboratory technician - 3212 - Pharmaceutical technician - 3213

  • scientific laboratory technician
  • biotechnical technician

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

62 / 100

Mostly holds up against AI

AI can take a few chores off your plate, but most of the day is still yours.

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: Exposed: Gradient 1

313 of 427 for holding up against AI

Why this score?

The ILO rated each of this job's 13 tasks for how much of it AI could do. They average 38.1 out of 100, so it holds up at 100 − 38.1 = 61.9.

That's the whole sum. No black box, no secret sauce: you can check it against the ILO's study. ILO group “Exposed: Gradient 1”: The mildest of the ILO’s four “exposed” groups.

This job rates 52.1 out of 100 for how hands-on it is. The score above only looks at AI tools, not robots, and for work like this robots are the bigger question.

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

Man v Bot · compare

Who holds up better?

Life science technicians (excluding medical) 62

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.

  • Data analysis and modelling.
  • Databases and logs.
  • Recording test results.

Man

What people still do better

Judgement, trust and skilled hands. Hard to download.

  • Preparing samples and cultures.
  • Running and maintaining equipment.
  • Safety and quality in the lab.

Both

What's arriving

New work that only exists because the AI does.

  • Robotic and automated labs.
  • Biotech and genomics.
  • Checking AI-analysed results.

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

40 could do without you

It could take over some of the work, and help with more. It could help with 72 of 100.

The robot

The wildcard. Has hands, still working out stairs.

How much it matters here: Some

52 how hands-on

A fair part of this job is hands-on, so robots would be needed for that part, not just software.

So could a robot do the physical part?

Less fine handwork and fewer cramped spaces than a typical hands-on job. That clears one hurdle for machines. It doesn't mean machines are doing this work yet.

Robots hate fiddly work in awkward spaces. On that measure, this job scores 37 out of 100. The higher it is, the longer the robot waits.

52 How
hands-on
37 How fiddly
and cramped

Kind of hands-on work Hands-on, less fiddly work

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 2 US jobs .

finger skill 42 · hand skill 41.1 · cramped spaces 27.5 · averaged · rule: hands-on 50+ · fiddly under 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 71, against an average of 38. The bigger the gap, the more lopsided the job: some of it wide open to AI, some of it barely touched.

  1. 71

    Using computers to develop models and analyse data

    Medium
  2. 63

    Maintaining relevant databases.

    Medium
  3. 61

    Making observations of tests and analysing, calculating, recording and reporting test results using appropriate scientific methods

    Medium
  4. 48

    Keeping detailed logs of worked performed

    Low
  5. 42

    Participating in the research, development and manufacture of products and processes

    Low
  6. 38

    Preserving, classifying and cataloguing specimens and samples

    Low
  7. 34

    Assisting in designing, setting up and conducting experiments

    Low
  8. 31

    Monitoring experiments to ensure adherence to correct laboratory quality control procedures and health and safety guidelines

    Low
  9. 30

    Ordering and stocking laboratory supplies

    Low
  10. 25

    Collecting and preparing specimens and samples, chemical solutions and slides and growing cultures for use in experiments

    Low
  11. 24

    Performing routine field and laboratory tests

    Very Low
  12. 20

    Setting up, calibrating, operating and maintaining laboratory instruments and equipment

    Very Low
  13. 11

    Using complex and high-powered equipment to perform work

    Very Low

13 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
72
AI does it for you
40

Sidekick wins, by 32 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 3114

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 0.08% 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

41
59

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.

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 lab science technicians be worried?

Short answer: not much. Some of the chores will change, and good riddance.

Parts of it are changing. Computer modelling, databases and analysing test results are rated Medium; logs, research support, cataloguing, experiments, quality control, supplies and preparing samples are Low; routine tests and equipment rate Very Low. Lab automation and AI take on data work; hands-on lab work stays human.

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 82 jobs in the “Technicians and associate professionals” family, averaging 65. This one is below the family average.

Pit this against any other job →