Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 69, No. 2, 2013, pp. 209--234 Cultural Schemas, Social Class, and the Flexibility Stigma ∗ Joan C. Williams University of California-Hastings College of the Law Mary Blair-Loy University of California-San Diego Jennifer L. Berdahl University of Toronto “First comes love, then comes marriage, then come flex-time and a baby carriage.” –Statement of a supervisor, Velez v. Novartis lawsuit (Wilson, 2010) Flexibility programs have become widespread in the United States, but their use has not. According to a recent study, 79% of companies say they allow some of their employees, and 37% officially allow all or most of their employees, to periodically change starting or quitting times (Galinsky, Bond, & Sakai, 2008). Although researchers often regard the official availability of flexibility and other work–life policies as an indicator of an organization’s responsiveness to em- ployees’ work–life concerns (Davis & Kalleberg, 2006), having policies on the books does not always mean that workers feel comfortable using these policies (Blair-Loy, Wharton, & Goodstein, 2011). Studies that have assessed usage rates generally find that usage rates are low. This has proved a remarkably resilient problem. The basic forms of work- place flexibility have been around for decades: flextime, part-time schedules, compressed workweeks, job shares (Friedman, n.d.). Yet usage of these programs ∗ Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Joan C. Williams, Distinguished Professor of Law, Hastings Foundation Chair, Founding Director, Center for WorkLife Lawm, UC Hastings College of the Law, 200 McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA 94102. Tel: (415) 565-4706 [e-mail:
[email protected]].