DUE TO A MISHAP IN THE TRANSLATION OF ZULU TIME; A FLT ATTENDANT WAS NOT INFORMED AND DID NOT RPT FOR AN ACR'S SCHEDULED FLT DEP. TO PREVENT A DELAY; THE CAPT AND THE SENIOR FLT ATTENDANT DETERMINED THAT A DEADHEADING CAPT COULD SUBSTITUTE FOR DUTY AT THE EMER EXIT. IT LATER BECAME APPARENT TO THE CREW THAT THIS ACTION WAS NOT LEGAL.

Narrative

A FLT ATTENDANT WAS GIVEN THE WRONG TIMES TO RPT FOR WORK; LEAVING US ONE FLT ATTENDANT SHORT FOR A FLT FROM GPT TO ATL. A VERY SENIOR AND EXPERIENCED CAPT WITH MY COMPANY; WHO WAS DEAD-HEADING HOME INDICATED THAT HE WAS BOTH LEGAL ON DUTY TIME AND QUALIFIED TO PERFORM THE TASKS REQUIRED OF A FLT ATTENDANT. HE SAID THAT HE WOULD BE WILLING TO PERFORM THOSE TASKS AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN AN EFFORT TO KEEP FROM DELAYING THE FLT. WE THEREFORE FLEW THE FLT TO ATL WITH THE CAPT PERFORMING THE FLT ATTENDANT TASKS. FROM ATL RETURNING TO GPT WAS A FERRY FLT AND THEREFORE THE CAPT WAS ABLE TO LEAVE THE ACFT IN ATL AS PLANNED. THE DAY FOLLOWING THE INCIDENT I RECEIVED A CALL FROM OUR DIRECTOR OF OPS REGARDING THE INCIDENT. HE INDICATED THAT HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE CAPT TO PERFORM THOSE DUTIES; AND THAT HE WAS RESEARCHING THE ISSUE. AT THIS POINT IN TIME I HAVE NOT YET HEARD IF THE INVESTIGATION REVEALED ANY PROBS. THE PROB DEVELOPED BECAUSE OF PEOPLE NOT BEING ABLE TO PROPERLY CONVERT ZULU TIMES AND DATES INTO ACTUAL LCL TIMES AND DATES. AS A RESULT NEITHER THE FLT ATTENDANT NOR CREW SCHEDULING CAUGHT THE FACT THAT THE SHOW DATE LCL WAS ACTUALLY THE DAY BEFORE THE ZULU DATE OF DEP. I BELIEVE THAT A REMEDY TO THIS PROB WOULD BE TO HAVE ALL TIMES CONVERTED TO LCL DEP TIMES RATHER THAN USING ZULU TIMES FOR CREW SCHEDULING. I BELIEVED THE CAPT IN QUESTION WHEN HE INDICATED HE WAS LEGAL TO PERFORM THE TASKS REQUIRED OF A FLT ATTENDANT. IN THE FUTURE I BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO VERIFY THE LEGALITY OF AN UNEXPECTED CIRCUMSTANCE SUCH AS THIS WITH COMPANY OFFICIALS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE ACTION. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT HE REGRETS NOT HAVING HAD A BETTER KNOWLEDGE OF THE REGS THAT GOVERN THE NUMBER OF FLT ATTENDANTS REQUIRED ON BOARD DURING FLT. HE HAD EVEN NAIVELY JOKED WITH THE PAX ON THE PA ABOUT THE REPLACEMENT FLT ATTENDANT; TELLING THE PAX TO 'GO EASY ON THIS NEW FLT ATTENDANT.' ANOTHER EMPLOYEE WHO HAPPENED TO BE DEADHEADING ON THIS SAME ACFT QUESTIONED HIS SOLUTION TO THE MISSING FLT ATTENDANT AND PROCEEDED FURTHER WITH THIS ISSUE. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 335138: IT WASN'T UNTIL AFTER THE FLT HAD LANDED AND WAS COMPLETED WHEN THE DISCUSSION TOOK PLACE ABOUT THE VALIDITY OF A FLC MEMBER BEING POSITIONED AT A FLT ATTENDANT STATION. MY ONLY RECOURSE IS THIS RPT; AND A CLRER DEFINITION FROM OUR DIRECTOR OF OPS AND THE PRINCIPAL OPERATING INSPECTOR.