A labour relations board adjudicator has called the 2006 dismissal of special public works adviser Douglas Tipple a "sham" and "camouflage," accusing Stephen Harper's government of obstruction in the man's attempt to clear his name.

Not only that, but adjudicator Dan Quigley — who issued five compliance orders over two years when the federal government refused to hand over documents — made the rare move of assessing damages against the government in the wrongful dismissal charges brought by Tipple, a real estate expert.

Tipple's case was first up, but the same outcome is expected for David Rotor, a procurement specialist who was also publicly fired on Aug. 31, 2006.

The damages against the government could add up to $2 million each. "It's a substantial amount," Rotor said. "But it's trivial compared to the billions of dollars taxpayers lost because Doug and I were removed from our jobs."

The two men were hired from the private sector as part of The Way Forward campaign initiated by the Liberals in 2005 and spearheaded by I. David Marshall, then deputy public works minister.

The men, who made more than $300,000 a year, received glowing reports from Marshall and were exceeding expectations — with plans in place to save $3.25 billion over the following five years.

Former public works adviser Douglas Tipple, above, brought wrongful dismissal charges against the federal government. 'I must admit it's the first time in my career that I've been terminated for overachieving the results,' Tipple said. (CBC)

In real estate, Tipple planned to make more efficient use of government buildings, using industry standards for spacing, among other things. Rotor said he was going to reform the way government filled contracts, such as cutting the costs of selling to government, removing standing offers and reducing the government's latitude in choosing the second- or third-lowest bidders.

Then, in mid-August 2006, the pair became the subject of stories in the Globe and Mail newspaper that accused them of missing meetings on a trip to London and painted the trip as more of a junket than a worthwhile research venture. Public works department officials failed to defend them, and opposition parties called for them to testify to a Commons committee about their work.

Quigley decision calls testimony into question

At the time, Marshall told the men not to worry about the bad press. But after meetings with Michael Fortier, then public works minister in Harper's Conservative government, Marshall abruptly laid them off on the last day of August.

When asked about their departure in the House of Commons, junior public works minister James Moore said the pair were "held accountable" and "no longer work for the federal government," implying that they were dismissed for their actions on the junket.

The 108-page decision by the Public Service Labour Relations Board details evidence that not only contradicts Moore and the impressions left by the August 2006 stories in the Globe and Mail but calls into question the testimony of Marshall, who is now president and CEO of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board of Ontario.

At one point in his testimony before the board, Marshall — who is travelling in Europe and could not be reached for comment — tried to make the case that he considered firing Tipple because he was too successful and moving too fast.

"I find that incredible, to be honest," Tipple told the CBC in an exclusive interview Monday. "That was the whole purpose of my being retained by the government, so I must admit it's the first time in my career that I've been terminated for overachieving the results."

The decision does not explain what the layoff excuses were attempting to "camouflage." Tipple was loath to speculate, but Rotor said the pair couldn't help but irritate bureaucratic and private-sector powerbrokers when they were cutting so much from the budget.

Rotor says some members of the bureaucracy had been moved aside in his and Tipple's hirings, and others may have feared the cuts in staffing he and Tipple were planning. However, both he and Tipple were ebullient in their praise of the bureaucrats they worked with, many of whom were thirsty for change.

Rotor leans more to the influence of big business, whom he claims was mounting a $10-million campaign to criticize The Way Forward.

A must-read for conspiracy theorists

The Quigley decision is a must-read for conspiracy theorists and those fascinated by the inner workings of government. It describes a Byzantine bureaucracy seemingly intent on making life difficult for Rotor, Tipple and The Way Forward.

On their trip to London at the end of June 2006, reports came back from the Canadian High Commission in London that Rotor and Tipple had missed meetings. Apology letters were sent, even though Tipple had never missed a meeting, and Rotor never missed a meeting confirmed by the High Commission.

The apology letters were the linchpin for what would unfold in front-page stories in the Globe and Mail, which included inferences of plagiarism in trip reports and using the trip as a vacation with their wives.

The labour relations board hearing confirmed that an internal investigation showed a high-ranking bureaucrat at Public Works had sent an early draft of the trip report to an employee at the High Commission, who sent a fax to the Globe. That High Commission employee was disciplined for her actions.

What irritated both Rotor and Tipple the most was how poorly the spokespeople for Public Works handled the accusations of the Globe. Was it incompetence? Or by design?

According to emails that emerged at Tipple's hearing, political aides were in direct contact with public works spokesman Mario Baril to orchestrate the department's response. Those emails, only received through repeated disclosure orders, showed that bosses at Public Works were trying to figure out a way to dismiss the pair, and they eventually decided on a "layoff."

To prepare for that "layoff," Public Works commissioned a study of the pair's trip to London. The report, prepared by Shahid Minto, who is now the government's first-ever procurement ombudsman, was sent to Marshall with an email that said: "I hope this doesn't cause problems for you."

The Minto report exonerated the pair: "Notwithstanding scheduling conflicts and missed meetings, the advisers appear to have met with fairly senior and experienced officers in the government and private sector who were knowledgeable on the matters relating to the objectives of the trip."

Two months later, when both minister Fortier and junior minister Moore were asked about the London trip, neither acknowledged the reports submitted by Rotor and Tipple or the internal review compiled by Minto.

Fortier "had a chance to clear our names, yet again, but he didn't," Rotor said Monday. "Of course, it would have been difficult for him to justify getting rid of two people who had been exonerated and were exceeding expectations."

The former special adviser said the unlikely series of events is confusing to understand.

David Rotor, a procurement specialist, was let go by Public Works at the same time as Tipple, in August 2006: 'It might have started out as a vendetta by civil servants, but it looks like the politicians looked upon the mess that was created, and opportunistically left us to hang.' (CBC)

"It might have started out as a vendetta by civil servants," said Rotor, 45, "but it looks like the politicians looked upon the mess that was created, and opportunistically left us to hang."

The implications were huge for both Tipple and Rotor, who say they had come to the public sector intent on helping the country with what they had learned in their careers. Not only did they suffer from being vilified in the media, but the pair were named among Toro magazine's top 10 losers of 2006.

Rotor's friends got him contract work, but everywhere he and Tipple went, they were asked to explain how they ended up on the front page of the Globe.

"The allegations of wrongdoing and implications of unethical behaviour really preclude you from performing senior roles either as an executive or at a board level," said Tipple, 60, whose lawyer, Stephen Victor, simply Googled Tipple's name at the hearing to show his client had suffered. "So it was difficult in resuming the activities that I had been used to and wanted to continue to perform. It was devastating."

Quigley reflected the impact on Tipple when he awarded unprecedented damages (the previous high for labour board damages was less than $200,000). He was assigned $125,000 for psychological injury, $250,000 for loss of reputation and $700,000 for lost wages. The initial damages are for $1.35 million, including interest, but that will expand when the legal fees are added because the government refused to hand over documents.

Tipple claims he is flummoxed by what really happened. All he knows is that his story acts as a cautionary tale for anybody from the private sector who has the temerity to think he can change the way Ottawa works.

With files from Julie Ireton