Will AI replace Pharmacy Technicians?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 21 official task statements scored for Pharmacy Technicians (United States, SOC 29-2052), 20% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 32 out of 100 (range 27–38, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.

Which tasks in “Pharmacy Technicians” can AI already do?

The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Prepare and process medical insurance claim forms and records” (88/100, very high); “Establish or maintain patient profiles, including lists of medications taken by individual patients” (81/100, very high); “Compute charges for medication or equipment dispensed to hospital patients and enter data in computer” (81/100, very high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.

Which tasks in “Pharmacy Technicians” stay human?

About 71% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Restock intravenous (IV) supplies and add measured drugs or nutrients to IV solutions under sterile conditions to prepare IV packs for various uses, such as…” (0/100, minimal); “Prepack bulk medicines, fill bottles with prescribed medications, and type and affix labels” (0/100, minimal); “Deliver medications or pharmaceutical supplies to patients, nursing stations, or surgery” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.

What should someone working in “Pharmacy Technicians” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 20% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 71% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.

How is the AI exposure score for Pharmacy Technicians calculated?

Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 21 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

US dataswitch to UK

Pharmacy Technicians

receiving written prescription or refilling requests and verifying that information is complete and accurate, answering telephones, responding to questions or requests and assisting customers by answering simple questions. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI is already taking a real slice of the routine work here: establishing or maintaining patient profiles. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 20%
changing shape: 10%
staying human: 71%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

Whole-job exposure score 32 out of 100 (27–38 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 21 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.

How we know this

What is measured: Every published task statement for pharmacy technicians is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-04. Read the full method.

That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, maintaining proper storage and security conditions for drugs, stays yours. New tools, same person answering for it.

Your week, as this page understands it

Prepare medications under the direction of a pharmacist. May measure, mix, count out, label, and record amounts and dosages of medications according to prescription orders. The job title says “pharmacy technicians”. The real job is the part underneath: maintaining proper storage and security conditions for drugs. That is the thing someone has to be right about.

The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But pharmacy technicians is not one task. It is 21 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is maintaining proper storage and security conditions for drugs, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 20%
changing shape: 10%
staying human: 71%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

How we know this

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-04. Read the full method.

Your job, task by task

These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.

One task scored differently between repeat runs, so its range on this page is wider. We would rather show the wobble than hide it.
1 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Shifting to AI

4 tasks

Tasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.

Establishing or maintaining patient profiles
This is reading one thing and writing another: patient profiles in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Establish or maintain patient profiles, including lists of medications taken by individual patients.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (77–85 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Patient medication lists are built and kept current from data the pharmacy system already holds.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Entering prescription information into computer databases
This is reading one thing and writing another: prescription information in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Enter prescription information into computer databases.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Prescription details now arrive electronically and fill the system directly, so the typing step is already largely automated.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Preparing and processing medical insurance claim forms and records
This is reading one thing and writing another: medical insurance claim forms in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 5 · Supplemental
Source: “Prepare and process medical insurance claim forms and records.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 88 out of 100 (84–92 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Insurance claims are structured forms built from data already in the system, and processing them is largely electronic.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Computing charges for medication or equipment dispensed to hospital patients and entering data in computer
This is reading one thing and writing another: charges in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 5 · Supplemental
Source: “Compute charges for medication or equipment dispensed to hospital patients and enter data in computer.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (77–85 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Charges follow set pricing rules applied to dispensing records, which billing software calculates automatically.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Changing shape

2 tasks

Tasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.

Answering telephones, responding to questions or requests
The software now makes the first pass at telephones, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Answer telephones, responding to questions or requests.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Automated phone systems already take refill requests and answer common questions, passing anything clinical to the pharmacist.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Pricing stock and marking items for sale
The software now makes the first pass at stock, but part of it still happens in the physical world. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Price stock and mark items for sale.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 41 out of 100 (34–48 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Working out prices is automatic from the system, though putting the labels onto the items is done by hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.

Staying human

15 tasks

Tasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.

Maintaining proper storage and security conditions for drugs
This work happens in the physical world: proper storage, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Maintain proper storage and security conditions for drugs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (1–15 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Temperature and access can be monitored electronically, but keeping medicines properly stored and secured happens physically in the pharmacy.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Receiving and storing incoming supplies
This work happens in the physical world: supplies, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Receive and store incoming supplies, verify quantities against invoices, check for outdated medications in current inventory, and inform supervisors of stock needs and shortages.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 33 out of 100 (26–40 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Matching invoices and flagging expiry dates is data work, but unpacking and shelving the actual stock is done by hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Receiving written prescription or refilling requests and verifying that information is complete and accurate
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for written prescription, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Receive written prescription or refill requests and verify that information is complete and accurate.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 36 out of 100 (29–43 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Electronic prescriptions arrive as data and completeness checks are rule-based, though pharmacies work under regulated, licensed supervision.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Assisting customers by answering simple questions
This work happens in the physical world: customers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Assist customers by answering simple questions, locating items, or referring them to the pharmacist for medication information.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Simple questions can be answered automatically, but helping someone find an item in the shop means being there with them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Show the other 11 tasks

Pricing and filing prescriptions
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: prescriptions, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Price and file prescriptions that have been filled.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 36 out of 100 (29–43 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Pricing comes straight from the system, though physically filing finished prescriptions in the collection bins is done by hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Ordering, labelling and counting stock of medications, chemicals or supplies and entering inventory data into computer
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: stock of medications, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Order, label, and count stock of medications, chemicals, or supplies and enter inventory data into computer.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 36 out of 100 (29–43 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Reordering and inventory data are automated in modern pharmacies, but counting and labelling the physical stock is hands-on.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Operating cash registers to accept payment from customers
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: cash registers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Operate cash registers to accept payment from customers.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 12 out of 100 (5–19 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Self-service tills show payment can be automated, but staffing a counter still means someone standing at the register.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Maintaining and merchandising home healthcare products or services
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: home healthcare products, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Maintain and merchandise home healthcare products or services.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 12 out of 100 (5–19 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Product choices can be planned from sales data, but arranging the displays and shelves happens in the shop.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Supplying and monitoring robotic machines that dispense medicine into containers and label the containers
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: robotic machines, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Supply and monitor robotic machines that dispense medicine into containers and label the containers.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 9 out of 100 (2–16 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: The machine does the dispensing, but someone has to keep it loaded and watch it in the pharmacy.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Cleaning and helping maintain equipment or work areas and sterilizing glassware
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: maintain equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Clean and help maintain equipment or work areas and sterilize glassware, according to prescribed methods.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cleaning benches and equipment and sterilising glassware is physical work done in the pharmacy.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Transferring medication from vials to the appropriate number of sterile
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: medication, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Transfer medication from vials to the appropriate number of sterile, disposable syringes, using aseptic techniques.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Drawing medicine from vials into sterile syringes is careful hands-on work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Mixing pharmaceutical preparations, according to written prescriptions
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: pharmaceutical preparations, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Mix pharmaceutical preparations, according to written prescriptions.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Compounding a medicine means physically measuring and mixing ingredients at the pharmacy bench.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Delivering medications or pharmaceutical supplies
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: medications, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Deliver medications or pharmaceutical supplies to patients, nursing stations, or surgery.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–7 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence, and it moved between repeat runs, so the range is widened.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Taking medicines to a patient, ward or surgery means physically carrying them there.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Prepacking bulk medicines, fill bottles with prescribed medications and type and affix labels
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: bulk medicines, fill bottles, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Prepack bulk medicines, fill bottles with prescribed medications, and type and affix labels.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Counting tablets into bottles and sticking on labels is physical dispensing work, even where machines assist.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Restocking intravenous
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: intravenous, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Restock intravenous (IV) supplies and add measured drugs or nutrients to IV solutions under sterile conditions to prepare IV packs for various uses, such as chemotherapy medication.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Preparing IV bags and additives under sterile conditions is physical preparation work at the hood.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: $45,750a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this
Source: bls-oews
Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
Rounding: Shown as published.
People doing this job: 471,680in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)

What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.

Why this is shifting

The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: patient profiles in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: establishing or maintaining patient profiles and entering prescription information into computer databases. What it cannot do is be answerable: proper storage needs a named person the rules will accept, and software cannot be that person. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.

Your move

Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend

Start with what does not change: maintaining proper storage and security conditions for drugs is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.

So, given all that: 20% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 10% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 71% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 21 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

So the thing worth your attention is not the job going away. It is the layer around it. Establishing or maintaining patient profiles is the part turning into software, and being the person who understands that layer is worth money.

This week: one thing

Ask the one question. Find whoever is bringing new software into your workplace (the manager, the office, whoever runs the system) and ask them what it is meant to do to patient profiles, and what it is not meant to touch. Ten minutes, this week, before anyone decides it for you.

What you end up holding: a straight answer about what is actually being rolled out, and when
How long it takes: ten minutes

If there’s nobody obvious to ask, or you’d rather not ask your manager: Put the same question to your union rep, your shift lead or the person who has been there longest, in person, over a break. Same ten minutes, same answer, and you will usually get a straighter one. Write down what they say. The note is the artifact, and it tells you whether proper storage is in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no license needed.

Over the next 90 days

Get inside the tool rollout rather than waiting for it. Over the next ninety days, ask to be in the group that tests, checks or signs off whatever new system arrives near answering telephones, responding to questions or requests. It is usually an unglamorous seat that nobody fights for, and it is the one that decides how the software is used on your job rather than to it.

Over the next 12 months

On this evidence I would not retrain out of this job, and I will say that plainly rather than hedge it. The task list here is dominated by work that stays with a person. What I would do with a year is get formally recognised for the layer around it (the systems, the compliance, the planning), so you are the one who understands the software instead of the one it is done to. Before you pay for anything, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.

The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them

I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.

I checked the 12 nearest US occupations to pharmacy technicians (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was pharmacy aides: only about 10% of its durable work is work you already do, it pays 17.6% less and there are far fewer of those jobs than of yours. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 32/100 here, with only 20% of the task list in the top band, and “maintain proper storage and security conditions for drugs” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.

How that was checked: this job was compared against all 830 US occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.

3 moves I checked and rejected

These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.

Pharmacy Aides
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already operate cash registers to accept payment from customers, and their equivalent is to operate cash register to process cash or credit sales. Across both published task lists that is about 10% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 10% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on. It is a pay cut, in those words: $37,680 against your $45,750, 17.6% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice. And it is a narrow door: about 39,530 of those jobs against 471,680 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 8% as many seats.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Stockers and Order Fillers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already order, label, and count stock of medications, chemicals, or supplies and enter inventory…, and their equivalent is to receive and count stock items, and record data manually or on computer. Across both published task lists that is about 5% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 5% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $37,330 against your $45,750, 18.4% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Veterinary Technologists and Technicians
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already clean and help maintain equipment or work areas and sterilize glassware, according to…, and their equivalent is to clean and sterilize instruments, equipment, or materials. Across both published task lists that is about 5% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 5% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →

What I’d stop worrying about

A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.

The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 20% of its task weight, across 21 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The headlines about your trade disappearing
They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like maintaining proper storage and security conditions for drugs arrive through rules, insurance and money, slowly and visibly. This page tracks the task evidence and will move when it moves.
Retraining out of a job that is holding up
On this evidence I would not spend money leaving. Spend it on the layer around the job instead: the tools, the paperwork, the planning. That is where the change actually is.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.

You are reading the United States figures

The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Pharmaceutical technicians is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.

Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match

The other groups this work is counted across:

Pharmacy and optical dispensing assistants

In UK official statistics this job is counted as Pharmaceutical technicians and Pharmacy and optical dispensing assistants. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.

Your route through this

Where to go next, and what it costs

Free, and complete

The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.

Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
American Job Center locator
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
- CareerOneStop local help hub
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop
Free

No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for pharmacy technicians, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 20% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.

Try The AI Authority free →

7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.

The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for pharmacy technicians. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for pharmacy technicians launches. Nothing else.

That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.

We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.

No Space for pharmacy technicians yet. Should there be one?

Collab365 Spaces is built by the same people as this site. We find the problems that AI and automation are creating inside one kind of work, then solve them as short courses, briefings and Blueprints. Each Space is the community too, so the research and the people doing your job are in the same place.

What a Space actually is, in full

Collab365 launches new communities where the need is real. If one for pharmacy technicians existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

Your email

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for pharmacy technicians launches. We never sell it, never use it for unrelated marketing, and every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Our privacy policy has the full version.

This unlocks nothing. Every figure, every row and every step on this page is already yours, whether you fill this in or not.

No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.

Questions people ask about this job

Will AI replace Pharmacy Technicians?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 21 official task statements scored for Pharmacy Technicians (United States, SOC 29-2052), 20% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 32 out of 100 (range 27–38, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
Which tasks in “Pharmacy Technicians” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Prepare and process medical insurance claim forms and records” (88/100, very high); “Establish or maintain patient profiles, including lists of medications taken by individual patients” (81/100, very high); “Compute charges for medication or equipment dispensed to hospital patients and enter data in computer” (81/100, very high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
Which tasks in “Pharmacy Technicians” stay human?: About 71% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Restock intravenous (IV) supplies and add measured drugs or nutrients to IV solutions under sterile conditions to prepare IV packs for various uses, such as…” (0/100, minimal); “Prepack bulk medicines, fill bottles with prescribed medications, and type and affix labels” (0/100, minimal); “Deliver medications or pharmaceutical supplies to patients, nursing stations, or surgery” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
What should someone working in “Pharmacy Technicians” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 20% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 71% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
How is the AI exposure score for Pharmacy Technicians calculated?: Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 21 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

Where these numbers come from

About the data on this page

One task scored differently between repeat runs, so its range on this page is wider. We would rather show the wobble than hide it.
The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
1 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Task statements: onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights: onet-db (im-rt)
Scores: Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-04.
Pay and employment: bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))

Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.

The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.

The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.

How we score a job Download this release Look up another job

Using these figures?

Cite this

Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.

Plain text

Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).

BibTeX

@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
  title        = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
  author       = {{Collab365}},
  year         = {2026},
  url          = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
  note         = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}

Permalink

https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1

Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.