Words: 811 (zero keyword stuffing)
Read Time: 4 minutes
Last Modified: 2025-07-02
ATS Optimisation
Let’s clear something up.
Airlines aren’t impressed by AI-generated resumes stuffed to the gills with keywords and acronyms. It’s the CV equivalent of trying to shove a 100kg carry-on into the overhead and pretending it fits. This industry knows all those tricks.
And yet, some advice floating around suggests exactly that: cram your CV with “airport codes,” “customer service,” “emotional intelligence” and hope the ATS spits out a golden ticket.
But, it doesn’t work like that.
The ATS scans for reality.
They’re not passing someone who knows how to sprinkle “customer” like parmesan on a CV.
Even if a keyword-stuffed resume squeaks past the ATS filter like a dodgy item through airport security. Then what?
Next up is a structured, multi-step recruitment process that’s tougher than ATS screening.
The recruiters aren’t trained by algorithms. They are trained on the line, from watching millions of people. If something was missing from a CV, and that CV only got accepted because of its gimmicks, that gap will show up in the interview process and recruiters will catch it.
And because one gimmick tends to become another — cheatsheets, memorised phrases, copy-paste answers — on and on it goes until you become me. By interview number nineteen, I was monitoring my eye-accessing cues because I was so riddled with rules and tricks.
For twenty years since, I’ve tested the shortcuts. I’ve studied the patterns. I’ve coached candidates through the system. Airlines are smart. They’ve seen every hack.
They also have real human passengers, which means they adhere to safety and security regulations. Why does that matter? Because winning over an airline starts with thinking like an airline — not like a desperate applicant trying to beat a machine.
So, let’s start there.
Whilst applicants focus on ATS’ing their resumes, airlines are focused on an entirely different set of acronyms — USCIS, FAA, GCAA, and every other regulatory body that governs background checks, safety compliance, and visa eligibility.
After regulations, airlines want to know you can do the actual job.
Can you brief an ABP during a decompression? Can you identify an LRBL in a bomb threat? Can you secure the cabin for an RTO while staying calm and in command? Can you manage an UM when they’re in tears mid-flight?
These are all the acronyms that matter to the airline. And the systems are looking for experience that tallies with it.
Airline ATS reads patterns. It pieces together a portrait of who you are, based on the sum of your choices: job titles, phrasing, job length, relevance. It’s not asking “Did they say customer service 45 times?” but “Does this person demonstrate customer service?”
They care whether you’re qualified, credible, and capable.
A CV that hits the right components doesn’t need gimmicks.
Meaningful optimisation vs keyword spamming
There’s a difference between dressing your CV in airline-friendly language — and ramming overstuffed spam into the system and hoping something sticks. The latter is passenger behaviour, not crew behaviour.
Not All Keyword Targeting Is Equal
Bad keyword targeting looks like this:
- A shopping list of airports and their codes (LAX, DXB, SIN, CDG…). Who advised this, really? Unless you’re applying to be a baggage carousel, airlines don’t care what terminals you can name. Instead of London Heathrow (LHR) get some First Aid (CPR) experience to shove in there instead. Instant upgrade.
- Buzzwords with no backbone — “safety”, “security”, “emergency” pasted five times. “Customer service” is cold. It’s vague. But “receptionist”? That’s tangible. It carries an image — the front desk, the first impression, the human face of a business.
- Internal job titles no one understands — “Brand Evangelist”, “People Alchemist”, “Happiness Coordinator”, “Talent Acquisition Expert”. Cute. But if the ATS doesn’t recognise it, it doesn’t count.
Good keyword targeting looks like this:
- Common job titles — “Retail Assistant”, “Receptionist”, “Waiter”, “Cabin Crew”, “Hostess”. The ATS can read those. Recruiters can too. Everyone breathes easier.
- Translated terminology — Did you work with “clients”? Say “customers”. That’s the word every airline uses in its requirements, so you can be sure that’s the word they favour. This isn’t creative writing class — you don’t get points for fifty ways to say customer. (read more about this here.)
- Role-specific phrasing — “Managed difficult customers”, “resolved complaints”,. That’s not padding — that’s the job.
It’s not about tricking the ATS. It’s about talking in airline and letting your roles and descriptions tell your story.
- Stories trump statements.
- Experience trumps keywords.
- Real trumps rehearsed.
In the The Cabin Crew Interview Made Easy Finishing School, you’ll learn how to align your CV with what airlines actually want — and cut through the noise that gets spammy CVs tossed. You’ll do it with expert guidance and the support of peers who are just as serious as you.
