Janitors and Cleaners (Except Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners)
Explore safer careers (5)
Lower estimated automation risk
Why it fits
Fits experienced cleaners using hazard recognition, PPE, incident notes, inspections, and safety procedure follow-through.
Why it fits
Fits cleaners with safety focus using PPE, containment, regulated cleanup, decontamination, and procedure discipline.
Why it fits
Directly reuses cleaning standards, shift assignments, supplies, safety, inspections, and worker coaching.
Why it fits
Applies building upkeep, minor repairs, equipment checks, work orders, safety, and problem reporting.
Why it fits
Uses building access, sanitation issues, safety precautions, inspection routes, customer notices, and treatment records.
Occupation snapshot
What does this snowflake show?
What's this?
We rate jobs using four factors. These are:
- Chance of being automated
- Job growth
- Wages
- Volume of available positions
These are some key things to think about when job hunting.
Risk & user votes
Calculated automation risk
High Risk (61-80%): This occupation shows a significant risk of end-to-end replacement by automation. Many core parts of the role may be structured, repeatable, software-driven, or physically predictable enough for AI, machines, or robotic systems to take over. If you work in this area, it may be worth exploring safer related careers or moving towards more human-centred responsibilities.
More information on what this score is, and how it is calculated is available here.
Human strengths important in this job
These are human abilities and work contexts that are important in this occupation. They may help explain why parts of the role are harder to replace end-to-end, but they are not the only inputs into the automation score.
Thinking creatively
Quite importantWhy this matters
Decision-making and problem solving
Quite importantWhy this matters
Coordinating others’ work
Quite importantWhy this matters
Developing objectives and strategies
Quite importantWhy this matters
What users think
Based on 289 votes
Our visitors have voted they are unsure if this occupation will be automated. However, the automation risk level we have generated suggests a much higher chance of automation: 64% chance of automation.
What do you think the risk of automation is?
What is the likelihood that Janitors and Cleaners, Except Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners will be replaced by robots or artificial intelligence within the next 20 years?
Sentiment
Based on user votes over time
View sentiment trend
How opinions have changed over time
Pay & outlook
Wages
In 2024, the median annual wage for Janitors and Cleaners, Except Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners was $35,930 ($17 per hour).
The median annual wage for Janitors and Cleaners, Except Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners was 27.4% lower than the national median annual wage, which stood at $49,500.
View wage trend
Wages over time
Growth
The number of 'Janitors and Cleaners, Except Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners' job openings is expected to rise 2.0% by 2034
View employment trend
Total employment, and estimated job openings
Updated projections are due 09-2025.
Volume
As of 2024 there were 2,199,900 people employed as 'Janitors and Cleaners, Except Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners' within the United States.
This represents around 1.4% of the employed workforce across the country
Put another way, around 1 in 70 people are employed as 'Janitors and Cleaners, Except Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners'.
People also viewed
Job description
Keep buildings in clean and orderly condition. Perform heavy cleaning duties, such as cleaning floors, shampooing rugs, washing walls and glass, and removing rubbish. Duties may include tending furnace and boiler, performing routine maintenance activities, notifying management of need for repairs, and cleaning snow or debris from sidewalk.
O*NET-SOC code: 37-2011.00
What people are saying (19)
Don't get me wrong, i think it could be done, i just think the cost would be outrageous and that somebody would still often have to step in for unusual messes and vandalism.
A. Invest significantly in equipment and processes that make the tasks much easier to do, and
B. Put a lot of personal responsibility on the people causing messes, generating the trash, and otherwise making the work that is needed to be done.
For A, restrooms would have to be redesigned with standards for toilets, urinals, sinks, etc where automated brushes could easily reach them. Trash receptacles would also need regular emptying and cleaning. It could be done, and I believe they've even invented self-cleaning restrooms where it basically treats the entire interior like a dishwasher, locking it off and doing high pressure sprays with sanitizing chemicals. It would be very very expensive to redesign them in such a way, not to mention the ongoing maintenance costs of such precision equipment. Similar with locker/shower rooms, kitchenettes, and break areas.
For B, in order for desk waste receptacle collection to be automated, office workers would need to actually throw trash inside the trash can and not beside, behind, or underneath. They would need to have it in a fixed position, and keep the area in front of it clear, and not obstructed with personal items, stacks of paper, or other junk. Similar to automated vacuum robots, they would need the area they're to clean free of obstacles. The best way to clean greasy fingerprints off glass doors is simply not have them there in the first place; train people to put their hands on the handle. Office workers in particular are incredibly inconsiderate of the work they leave for others, and office facilities would rather hire double the amount of cleaning staff to be demeaned and jump through ridiculous and unnecessary hoops.
The amount of investment needed to automate janitorial tasks would be incredibly high. If they really wanted to save money, they could instantly probably cut 25-50% of their workforce budget by being considerate to others. But they'd much rather waste money on digging their heels into classism, ensuring there are "servants" to look down upon.
Reply to comment