In DiCentes v. Michaud, 1998 ME 227, 719 A.2d 509, the Law Court explained that, to prevail upon a claim of unlawful retaliation pursuant to the WPA, the employee must show: (1) that she engaged in activity protected by the WPA; (2) that she experienced an adverse employment action; (3) that a causal connection existed between the protected activity and the adverse employment action." Id. P14, 719 A.2d at 514.