This part especially burnt my biscuits:
"Manager Justin Zunino said Whitelaw had complained about Johnson last year. She said Johnson had made advances toward her and it made her feel uncomfortable, according to court documents. Zunino reported he’d told Johnson to “keep things professional,” and said Johnson “appeared to be receptive.”
Still, Zunino told police, Whitelaw had asked to work a different schedule just a few weeks ago, again, telling her manager Johnson made her feel uncomfortable. However, Whitelaw asked for additional hours – which, Zunino said required that she’d work with Johnson. Zunino said Whitelaw was told that would happen."
So Whitelaw's male manager told Whitelaw, the employee who had NOT had a complaint made against her, that there was no other way to accommodate her request for extra hours without having her work at the same time as Johnson. Of course there was a way to avoid that--FIRE the employee who's had a complaint made against him! But, the manager may have reasoned, that would not be fair to Johnson, who'd "seemed receptive" when his male manager told him to "keep it professional" (which, IMO, is a far cry from saying to Johnson, "Knock it the h**l off with the sexual harassment or find another job").
The manager seems to have decided that, if Whitelaw wanted the extra shifts that badly, she would just have to tolerate Johnson's sexual harassment. One can't go firing an employee just on the grounds of ONE female employee making a complaint about him, right?