This study examines two competing theoretical explanations for why work-life policies such as dependent care assistance and flexible schedules influence organizational attachment. The self-interest utility model posits that work-life policies influence organizational attachment because employee use of these policies facilitates attachment. The signaling model posits that these policies facilitate attachment indirectly through perceived organizational support. Regression analyses explored both models using a sample of 286 full time employees. Results supported both the signaling model and the self-interest utility model. For women, the availability of work-life benefits influenced organizational attachment irrespective of use, and these effects were mediated by support perceptions, consistent with the signaling model. In contrast, the self-interest model was also supported for men only. Specifically, the availability and use of flexible schedules interacted in predicting affective commitment among men such that flexible schedule availability was positively related to commitment only when use was high and negatively related to commitment when use was low. Dependent care assistance and schedule flexibility also interacted in predicting affective commitment, turnover intentions, and perceived organizational support, suggesting that the effect of policy implementation may depend on what other policies are already offered by the organization. Findings are discussed in terms of implications for theory and organizational practice.