In this case, HR manager Puja mentioned that with the expansion of globalization, Policies Regarding Expatriate Assignments have been changed, new local international policy has been proposed, it is a more cost effective solution to international transfers of employees that do not meet stricter expatriate program requirements.
They know that as a pure local contract would not be able to attract these employees, they provide some extra benefits to these local international hires. The local international contract fits between an expatriate and a local package. Even though these transfers are partly employee initiated, they provide a slow landing into the new country. There are two criteria that justify local international policy contracts: internal employee who is relocated, and not a talent or top potential employee.
And how local international policy different to a local package？
First, host country provides some kind of support costs covered by the company. Including Settling-in allowance (to cover the incidental miscellaneous expenses of a move, e.g. temporary accommodation and meals on arrival, school uniforms and books for school-age children), medical check up, Visa and permits (based on country standards), travel costs (outward journey; one home trip during first year). And some optional cover: Allowance for housing and school (-50% after first year, 0% after year 2), retention bonus, and allowances according to local needs
The aim of using local international policy is to localize the employee; some support is provided for first 2 years and becomes a local contract afterward. But employee must still fund various aspects, and no pre-assignment visit cover, they have to self-arrangement of housing, negotiating school.
Comparing to the home-based contract and local international contract, we can find some common ground, they all settling in allowance and providing support, providing home trip, and providing house and education allowance.