No I am not getting confused. You are assuming any job position is eternal. But reality job positions are dynamic and at some point it may not exist anymore. What do you mean by "they"? If consultant leaves (or contract gets over), the job position for client company becomes open (if exists at all). But that job position is does not belong to the consulting company. In this case, consultant company's job position is based on the client company's requirement. If client company is not giving/renewing contract to the same consulting company anymore, then for consutling company that position does not exist anymore. Logically if job position in certain location really existed, then the consultant was not required to be relocated at all. That is the very reason many consulting company file their employees LC from single location (preferably from their HQ location) and declare In LC/I-140 that the person can located "anywhere in USA".
Not sure where you got that number (90%). But augmentation is not an issue here. Many good consulting company do so in proper way. One options I already explained above - filing LC from HQ and clearly declaring it as consulting position. But many consulting company don't do so, but rather to make case stonger they stress on a job opening (in client location) in a specific location - with very specific skillsets. It's mostly lawyer's mistake. But hey, many of them got thru successfully (except a few scapegoats - like here in ACE case) and lawyers are making money. Who am I to tell what is proper, what is mistake and what is wrong.
