Introduction
The results of Lighthouse Lab Services’ fourth annual Wage and Morale Survey of Medical Laboratory Professionals reveal that, five years after the seismic disruptions of the pandemic, the industry may finally be returning to its baseline norms. While this does not suggest that long-term pipeline and staffing challenges are behind us, the continued uptick in overall morale offers hope that today’s workforce is more prepared and able to address persistent issues like burnout and wage stagnation.
Our findings reveal an industry where professionals report higher overall morale and job satisfaction than in recent years. Although concerns about understaffing have improved, they remain stubbornly persistent and widespread. Wage growth appears stagnant, with several positions experiencing an overall decline in average compensation compared to 2024. However, this should likely be attributed to a slightly smaller overall reporting pool with different job demographics than in past years. Although most respondents received raises, the increases were generally modest and unlikely to significantly boost morale.
A notable concern is the persistent and widening wage gap between male and female professionals. In 2025, this disparity became even more pronounced in our data set.
Through this project, Lighthouse aims to identify correlations between wages, morale, job roles, and experience levels as the laboratory industry seeks new ways to advocate for training programs and attract fresh talent.
“It’s encouraging to see morale improving as we bring more visibility to the critical role lab professionals play in healthcare. Still, we must continue to expand the recruitment pipeline and career advancement opportunities to provide a long-term solution to ongoing staffing shortages.”
– Joe Kessler, Director of Recruiting & Staffing Services, Lighthouse.
Objectives
This survey is intended to inform the medical laboratory community about current wage levels, staffing, and overall satisfaction among laboratory professionals. We also aim to equip respondents with actionable data to guide their career decisions. Since our first survey in 2021, we have expanded our focus to include topics such as the gender wage gap, shift payment differentials, and new insights from CLIA lab director respondents.
Methods
Lighthouse Lab Services gathered responses from 811 lab professionals through newsletters, social media, and other outreach channels. Participation was voluntary and could be anonymous. Wage data was submitted by 611 individuals, primarily from Lab Assistants, Laboratory Scientists, Technicians, Technologists, Managers, Administrative Support, Administrative Lab Directors, and CLIA Medical Lab Directors. The majority of respondents were female (78%), and 38% of the total pool reported having 21 or more years of experience.
Results
- Morale & Satisfaction: This year, 53% of respondents reported being moderately or extremely satisfied in their current role, an increase from 52% in 2024 and 44% in 2023. Most respondents received salary increases in 2024, though these were generally modest. Persistent concerns about staffing and burnout are improving, yet continue to shape workplace experience for most, with 53% reporting their lab is understaffed. And while for the first time, a majority did not feel “overworked,” 48% still described their workload as too severe.
- Wages: Reported wages have largely stagnated, with many roles showing slight declines in average compensation compared to last year. Most reported raises were small, and many respondents felt these bumps did little to address wage stagnation or cost-of-living increases.
- Wage Gap: The gender wage gap persists and has widened. On average, male respondents reported earning 25% more than their female counterparts, up from a 23% gap in 2024. However, this figure is slightly skewed by a larger share of male respondents reporting they hold leadership positions in the lab.
- Pipeline Issues: While it’s no surprise to longtime industry advocates and observers, the data continues to underscore the need for more robust recruitment and training programs as experienced professionals retire.
Demographics and Education
In total, Lighthouse collected data from 811 respondents. Of those, 68% described their race/ethnicity as White or Caucasian, while 12% identified as Black or African American, and 7% as Asian or Pacific Islander. An additional 6% identified as Latino or Hispanic, with Native Americans/Alaskan Natives, multiracial or biracial individuals, and those identified as “not listed” or preferring not to disclose their ethnicity comprising the remainder of the population.
While individuals identifying as Technologists comprised nearly half of our 2024 responses, this year’s survey added “Laboratory Scientist” as a response to the industry’s widespread adoption of the title. For 2025, respondents identified their roles as Technologists (30%), followed by Laboratory Scientist (22%), Managers (16%), Technicians (13%), Administrative Lab Directors (8%), Lab Assistants/Accessioners (3%), Board Certified CLIA Lab Directors (2%), Phlebotomists (2%), and Administrative Support/Other (2%). Fewer than 2% of total respondents identified as LIS Managers or as Educators/Teachers.
A substantial majority of respondents (73%) said they worked in a high-complexity lab, and 20% described their lab as moderate complexity. Additionally, 2% served in waived-complexity labs, while 5% were unsure of the complexity of their lab. More than half of the individuals who responded to this survey indicated they are currently fulfilling a CLIA-designated role for their lab (53%).
Most individuals who completed the survey reported having earned a bachelor’s degree (58%) or master’s (20%). Those holding associate degrees totaled 14% of our responses, while 5% reported having earned a doctorate. Just 3% of respondents noted a high school diploma as their highest level of education.
Again, a plurality of individuals (38%) indicated they have 21 or more years of experience as a lab professional, while those with five or fewer years of experience comprised the second-most represented experience bracket with 19% of responses.
Staffing Levels Improve Again, But Continue to Impact Morale
Low staffing continues to impact morale, even as overall satisfaction improves. This year, 39% said their lab is moderately understaffed, and 14% described their lab as significantly understaffed (down from 19% in 2024). While this 53% total is an improvement from the 59% who reported some level of understaffing in 2024, it remains a major concern.
Almost half (47%) now feel their lab is adequately or well-staffed, up from 41% last year. Those who felt their lab was understaffed were more likely to be dissatisfied: among the 53% reporting moderate or significant understaffing, 32% were unsatisfied, and another 20% felt neutral about their morale. However, 48% of those with staffing issues still reported some level of satisfaction in their role, up from 43% last year.
For the first time, a plurality (45%) described their workload as “reasonable.” Still, 41% reported being “overworked,” and 14% felt “satisfied” with their workload.
Respondents consistently cited compensation and understaffing as the main drivers of turnover.
“Wages have not kept up with the cost of living,” wrote one respondent. “We are underpaid, overworked, and undervalued. I, along with five other techs I work with alone, will be leaving the lab completely in the next year. I know many who are discussing also leaving within the next five years.”
Another respondent suggested shifting from certification to licensure could boost the overall status of laboratory professionals within the healthcare hierarchy.
“We are not high school graduates pushing buttons,” this individual said. “I answer more disease-state-related result questions from nurses than any other question.”
Wage Averages by Position
The national average reported compensation across all positions was $91,565 collected from 611 respondents who chose to submit wage information. This total represents a very slight increase (<1%) over the reported average of $91,405 from 895 respondents in 2024.
The total pool of respondents for each position breaks down as follows: Technologists (207), Managers (119), Technicians (91), Laboratory Scientists (67), Administrative Lab Directors (59), CLIA Lab Directors (16), Administrative Support/Other (14), Lab Assistants/Accessioners (20), Phlebotomists (12), LIS Support/Specialist (5), and Educator/Teacher (1).
The chart below depicts the 2025 national annual compensation by position compared to data collected in 2024. Overall, the theme of wage growth in 2025 is stagnation, as several positions reported increases that were offset elsewhere.
Notably, the reported drop in compensation to CLIA Lab Directors is likely due to the variance in total respondents, which dropped by nearly 50% this year, and the absence of respondents from high-cost-of-living states (New York, California, and Hawaii).
- Technologist (207): $81K
- Manager (119): $119K
- Technician (91): $62K
- Laboratory Scientist (67): $112K
- Admin LD (59): $147K
- Lab Assistant/Accessioner (23): $46K
- CLIA LD (16): $193K
- Administrative Support Staff (16): $100K
- Phlebotomist (12): $48K
- LIS Manager/Specialist (5): $127K
We again chose to break out three states with an exceptionally high cost-of-living (HCL) due to the significant pay disparities reported by lab professionals within those states. The chart below presents national averages compared against reported averages for these HCL states, while the third bar shows national averages with wages reported from those states removed. Positions receiving fewer than five total responses for HCL states were not included.
Across positions where we received wage data for these three states, respondents averaged roughly 20%-40% more in annual compensation. Technologists and Managers reported the most substantial pay gap for HCL states, with professionals within these states reporting earnings nearly 38% greater than their counterparts in the other 47 states.
“Private practice labs, such as doctor’s office labs, pay very poorly,” wrote one respondent. “Also, insurance companies are beginning to drive testing to the large reference labs, such as LabCorp, which is taking work from these small labs.”
Admin Lab Director
- National (excluding CA, HI, NY): $142K (52)
- HCL states: $112,580 (7)
Lab Scientist:
- National (excluding CA, HI, NY): $105K (52)
- HCL: $136K (15)
Manager:
- National (excluding CA, HI, NY): $97K (109)
- HCL: $141K (10)
Technologist:
- National (excluding CA, HI, NY): $77K (190)
- HCL states: $113K (17)
Technician:
- National (excluding CA, HI, NY): $62K (85)
- HCL: $70K (5)
If you would like to compare these figures to our past reports, click below to view previous editions.
- VIEW PREVIOUS LLS WAGE & MORALE REPORTS:
Prevalence of Compensation Raises & Widening Gender Wage Gap
- 77% received a raise in the past year (down from 80% in 2024).
- 57% reported a raise of only 1-3%.
- Those without a recent raise were most likely to express dissatisfaction.
We have again elected to break out reported annual compensation averages by position for males and females after reporting a significant discrepancy in average compensation last year. Unfortunately, the gap has grown wider in the interim, with the average male respondent now reporting annual compensation 25% higher than the average female, up from a reported 19% gap in 2023 and a 23% discrepancy in 2024.
On average, the 127 men who provided wage data reported earning $113,000 annually compared to the average compensation of $88,000 reported by the 473 women who provided compensation data. The remainder of our wage respondents indicated they were non-binary or chose not to report their gender.
Average Reported Salaries for Females and Males
It’s worth noting that this discrepancy is driven in part by our pool of male respondents reporting a higher share of leadership roles (36% identified as an Admin/CLIA Lab Director or Lab Manager) than our pool of female respondents, with just 25% reporting they hold one of these titles. While this alone doesn’t excuse the overall pay disparity, we encourage labs to consider more qualified females for leadership roles moving forward, and in turn, encourage female professionals to seek out these positions.
The charts below break out a few additional details from our respondents:
Examining CLIA-Certified Lab Directors
As we continually seek to improve this survey, we’ve implemented additional efforts to filter responses between CLIA-Certified Lab Directors and their administrative counterparts to receive more accurate salary data. That said, we still received a wide range of salary responses across a limited pool of individuals. We received responses from 19 Lab Directors who indicated they are CLIA-certified, with 16 electing to submit salary data.
Here is a brief rundown of some of the other data we collected from this group:
Average salary: $193K (16)
Average amount made from consulting in 2023: $70K (8)
1099 or W-2, if employed by multiple labs?
- Both – 33%
- W-2 – 33%
- 1099 – 33%
One Lab Director blamed ongoing shortages on low reimbursements for those physicians.
“There is going to be an extreme shortage of pathologists due to low reimbursements,” they cautioned.
Overall Morale Shows Slight Gains
Reported satisfaction was positive overall: 53% moderately or extremely satisfied (up from 52% in 2024 and 44% in 2023). Just 26% were dissatisfied, while 21% were neutral. These numbers mark a return to pre-pandemic baseline levels.
While staffing and wage frustrations persist, many professionals remain passionate about their work:
“I only have a few years of experience in this field, and I love the work,” one respondent said. “However, I sometimes feel that I’ve made a mistake since our role in healthcare is not valued and we are not paid adequately.”
Satisfaction among lab professionals with five or fewer years of experience improved: 29% reported dissatisfaction (down from 31% last year), and 50% reported satisfaction in their roles, the highest ever in this survey.
As in previous years, respondents noted that increased visibility and public awareness of the profession are essential to addressing industry challenges.
Interestingly, for the first time, professionals with 11-15 years of experience reported the highest satisfaction (59%), surpassing the 21+ year cohort, which fell to 53% (down from 61% in 2024).
How Labs Have Rebounded Since the Pandemic
The landscape inside medical laboratories has shifted significantly since the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. In those early years, labs across the country faced unprecedented challenges: severe staffing shortages, supply chain disruptions, and overwhelming workloads became daily realities for many professionals. Morale suffered, and burnout reached record levels.
Fortunately, our survey responses reflect meaningful improvements in working conditions since that time. In our 2022 report, a striking 77% of respondents noted some level of understaffing in their lab, a clear indicator of the strain the pandemic placed on the workforce. This year, that figure has dropped to just 53%, marking a substantial improvement and a positive trend toward more sustainable staffing.
Alongside this shift, we’ve also seen significant gains in reported job satisfaction and overall morale. Lab professionals are reporting feeling better supported and more optimistic about their roles than at any time in the past several years. While structural pipeline challenges remain, these statistics demonstrate that many labs have made real progress in creating healthier, more resilient work environments.
However, despite these improvements, there are still those who feel the lab management must continue to improve to return to the pre-pandemic status quo.
“Post-Covid, things are not getting better, and the management has become strictly digital,” this individual said. “Constant training of new employees that only stay two years after their 1-3% increase of appreciation and no career ladder! This affects quality and morale!”
Conclusions & Recommendations
We are encouraged by the overall improvements in morale and the prevalence of raises, though pay increases remain modest and appear to have a limited impact on retention and staffing. Addressing compensation alone is not enough; laboratories must also maintain appropriate staffing levels, as understaffing remains the most pressing concern.
To further boost retention and morale, labs should:
- Clearly communicate career advancement and training opportunities.
- Invest in skills development.
- Consistently seek employee feedback to drive continuous improvement.
- Establish local partnerships with fellow laboratories, universities, and training programs to strengthen the long-term recruitment pipeline.
However, efforts to solve staffing shortages must not come at the expense of training and certification standards. The industry’s future depends on recruiting and developing qualified professionals, not lowering the bar for entry.
