Will AI replace embalmers?

Not on current evidence. Less than 30 minutes of a typical shift goes to tasks that AI or robots are doing today. The other 8h (100%) stays with people. Separately, BLS expects about 0.7% more of these jobs by 2035 (all jobs: +3.5%).

None of this job's tasks show regular AI use yet. That can mean the work is hands-on or in person, or simply that it rarely comes up in AI usage data.

Not in workplaces like this one, based on a 2026 review of robot deployments. 5 more tasks have only been done in factory setups built around the machine, so they stay with people here. For 16 physical tasks, no robot has shown it can do the work yet.

8h of a typical shift, or 100%, goes to tasks with no AI or robot evidence yet. No AI usage or robot deployment has shown up for these so far. The biggest:

• Perform the duties of funeral directors, including coordinating funeral activities. (1h 9m a shift)
• Remove the deceased from place of death and transport to funeral home. (46m a shift)
• Make incisions in arms or thighs and drain blood from circulatory system and replace it with embalming fluid, using pump. (40m a shift)
• Apply cosmetics to impart lifelike appearance to the deceased. (35m a shift)
• Dress bodies and place them in caskets. (35m a shift)

Much of it comes down to where and how the work happens. In-person, hands-on and high-stakes work is where AI and robots have made the least headway so far. In the official O*NET survey of people in this job:

• 99% talk face to face with others every day
• 94% say dealing with the public is very or extremely important
• 68% say a mistake would be very or extremely serious

On Indeed, job postings in the Personal Care & Home Health sector are at 151% of their February 2020 level (all U.S. postings: 104%), up 2.1% from a year earlier, as of Oct 9, 2026. BLS separately expects about 700 openings a year in this job through 2035. Across all U.S. postings, 7.3% now mention AI skills. Sector postings cover more than this one job and move for many reasons besides AI.

The median pay is about $58,780 a year ($28.26 an hour), 15% above the median for all U.S. jobs ($50,980). Most people in this job earn between $38,310 and $77,570 a year; that range covers the middle 80%. Pay figures are from BLS, May 2025, and vary a lot by state and employer. Pick a state to compare:

BLS projects growth of 0.7% from 2025 to 2035, compared with 3.5% growth for all jobs. That's about 4,000 jobs in 2035. It expects about 700 openings a year, mostly from people retiring or changing careers. These projections don't single out AI as a cause.

About 3,890 people in the U.S., roughly 0.00% of all workers (BLS, May 2025). That makes it the 740th largest of the 796 jobs on this site. BLS expects about 4,000 in 2035.

The most common requirement is an associate's degree: about 86% of people in the job said so in the official O*NET survey. O*NET rates the job at level 3 of 5 for preparation, which usually means: vocational school or associate's degree. Requirements vary by state and employer, especially for licensed work.

These come from the job's official skill ratings and from the tasks that AI and robots touch least today. Building them keeps you strong in the parts of the work that still need a person:

• Skills that matter more here than in most jobs: Speaking, Active Listening, Service Orientation, Time Management
• Get strong at the parts of the job that stay with people (listed above), which take 8h of a typical shift
• Tools employers list: Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Office software, Microsoft Word

These use similar skills. Matches come from 109 official ratings of skills, knowledge and work activities, and each needs the same or less preparation unless the official list relates the jobs directly:

• Morticians, Undertakers, and Funeral Arrangers (19m touched, $55k median pay)
• Funeral Attendants (1h 5m touched, $36k median pay)

Each task carries its own evidence label. For this job: 26 with no AI or robot evidence found. The minutes per task are estimates, not measured hours, and "no evidence" doesn't prove a task is safe.