Ethical Dilemma

The Supreme Court of Canada defined workplace sexual harassment as "unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature that detrimentally affects the work environment or leads to adverse job$-$related consequences for the victims of the harassment". This is a very broad definition.

Consider this example and whether it appears to fit the definition:

Connie Thiakos had a consensual affair with her boss. Both are married, but, when she ended the relationship $($with his apparent understanding$),$ his professional treatment of her deteriorated quickly. He criticized her at meetings, started assigning her much more difficult tasks for which she had not been trained, and told others that the quality of her work was weak.

She decides to seek legal advice on whether this could be considered sexual harassment. She also decides to officially report her boss to his supervisor. After all, she has worked for the company for much longer than her boss and has an impeccable work record before this. She doesn't want her boss to destroy her career.

Question $1$

Do you feel this is actually an example of sexual harassment? If so$,$ is it best described as gender harassment, unwanted sexual attention or sexual coercion? If not, why?

Question $2$

Consider the concept of procedural justice in this case. Describe how the boss's supervisor could go about gathering information and deciding how to handle it in ways that would likely be considered "fair" or "unfair".

Question $3$

What do you think would be an appropriate way to handle this situation and why?