Long before out-sourcing became an economic issue here in the U.S., many large corporations already had branches and factories in foreign countries. Their executive U.S. employees often were transferred to these other countries but continued to make the standard U.S. salary. If my company did as this company did, I would be trying very hard to relocate (by being transferred to or assigned to) to India. Imagine the money you could save after working and living in India while making a U.S. salary! While I consider this a form of outsourcing - afterall, there is nothing preventing the company from moving everything to India except for their corporate headquarters as others have done - it may actually strengthen the company which in the longrun may promote more hires here in the U.S. and could promote economic growth here in the U.S. as well.

>I came across this earlier. I have edited it for branding purposes.
>
>

>The Company is announcing today that it will expand its presence in India by opening an office in Mumbai in order to bring work currently outsourced back into the company
>and hire employees of The Company to fill these positions.  We plan to open the new office by mid-2006 with approximately 200 employees who will do work that we currently
>outsource to vendors in Mexico and India.  The work currently outsourced includes claims data entry jobs, IT coding/application development jobs and IT quality assurance
>jobs. Our existing business in India is a joint venture in which we own a majority interest in Another Company, which sells widgets and related widget services.
>

>
>How is this still not considered "outsourcing?" The jobs are still going to residents of India, as much as I can tell.