More than a year of tensions inside the office that shapes UCLA’s public image spilled into a Los Angeles courtroom Tuesday, as lawyers for a campus vice chancellor asked a judge to block the public release of an investigation into allegations from six employees that she bullied them or misused university funds.
Vice Chancellor Mary Osako oversees UCLA’s vast communications and marketing enterprise, which includes more than 100 workers. The 264-page investigative report by an independent law firm was commissioned by the university in response to whistleblower complaints by current and former employees who alleged Osako mistreated staff and steered university contracts to friends and former colleagues in violation of university policy, court documents said.
Separately from the whistleblower complaints, Osako’s chief of staff alleged in court filings that she faced retaliation after answering investigators’ questions.
Osako, who remains on the job with the support of UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk, has disputed many of the accusations and conclusions in the report. She said in court documents that if the report is released, the harm to her reputation would be “extremely difficult, if not impossible, to repair.”
At a hearing Tuesday, Mark Quigley, a lawyer for employees who filed whistleblower complaints, told Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Curtis A. Kin that the complaints were “very significant, very substantial.”
Kin said he had not seen the document and was unable to make a decision about it until he had. “I’m literally in a black box. I don’t know what’s in the report, other than what Ms. Osako says,” Kin said.
Osako’s lawyer, Paul Rigali, argued that Kin could decide to block the report’s release without reviewing it himself, citing Osako’s privacy interest. Rigali later said in court that he would not object to the judge reviewing a copy under seal.
The judge ordered UC and Osako’s lawyers to submit copies to him within one week. Kin also set a Dec. 8 hearing to rule on the document’s release, saying the investigation’s contents would temporarily remain out of public view.
After the hearing, Rigali said in a statement that “we respect the court’s decision to extend the restraining order while it reviews the report. Mary brought this action to protect her privacy rights by preventing the release of false allegations and personalized workplace disagreements that are irrelevant to the public interest.”
The legal fight
Osako sued the UC Board of Regents on Aug. 26 to stop the release of the Dec. 29, 2025, report by Grutman Law, a Sherman Oaks workplace investigations firm. UCLA had planned to make a redacted version public in response to California Public Records Act requests that employees submitted.
Seven current and former employees in her division filed sworn court statements opposing her request. Six employees attached their 2025 whistleblower complaints, submitted through a UC online system, to the court filings. The seventh, chief of staff Shilo Munk, filed a retaliation complaint with UCLA’s compliance office in May, which was also included in court documents.
Osako — who joined UCLA after holding top communications roles at Activision Blizzard, Amazon and Yahoo — has maintained Frenk’s backing. In a statement, he praised her leadership during a difficult period of budget shortfalls as well as Trump administration funding freezes, investigations and lawsuits.
“Vice Chancellor Osako, who was first appointed in 2019 and re-appointed to a subsequent five-year term in 2024, has led UCLA Strategic Communications through one of the most demanding periods in the university’s recent history,” Frenk said. “Mary’s work has required strong judgment and hard calls, which she has consistently made while nurturing a culture of fairness and camaraderie.”
Osako said in a written court declaration that “I have not been suspended, demoted, terminated, or otherwise formally disciplined as a result of the allegations discussed in the report.”
Brian Brokaw, an outside consultant UCLA hired to handle questions about the case, said in a statement that UCLA “takes workplace concerns seriously” but does not discuss personnel matters.
“The university engaged an outside investigator to review the concerns raised and carefully evaluated the findings through established personnel and legal processes,” Brokaw said.
UC has stayed neutral on Osako’s lawsuit. The university “takes no position on whether the records are exempt” from public release, its lawyer wrote this month.
In court filings, Osako’s lawyers argued the report falls under a public records exemption for personnel files.
The employees’ lawyers cited appeals court rulings allowing release of complaints against public employees that “reveal allegations of a substantial nature.”
Quigley and Christian Nickerson of Greene Broillet & Wheeler represent the former and current communications staffers who want the report released. Michael R. Goldstein of the UC Office of the General Counsel represents UC. Osako and the employees who filed complaints did not attend the hearing Tuesday.
The allegations
Five of the seven employees still work under Osako, including Munk, her chief of staff. In court documents, Munk alleged “ongoing retaliatory conduct that created professional harm, diminished my role and authority, and interfered with my ability to perform my assigned responsibilities.”
In their complaints attached to court filings, employees accused Osako of belittling staff and fostering a culture of “intimidation and fear.” One alleged that staff who disagreed with her or raised concerns “are punished, excluded, or reassigned,” court documents said. Another alleged in May 2025 that Osako was “actively looking for those using this service,” referring to the whistleblower hotline, and “asking people if they know who,” according to court filings.
Amanda Savercool, a former executive director of integrated marketing, alleged in a court filing that after her first interview with investigators, Osako “stopped speaking to me, even though I was her direct report.”
Osako’s lawyers wrote in a court document that the report “does not conclude that Ms. Osako ever engaged in retaliatory conduct.”
Michael Callahan, editorial director of UCLA Magazine, alleged in a whistleblower complaint contained in court documents that staff tried to “not incur the wrath and scorn of the vice chancellor.” He said he had been “in 12-step recovery for several years” and feared “losing my sobriety due to the unrelenting stress,” according to court documents.
Several employees alleged in court documents that Osako hired Cuore Collective, a strategic communications consulting firm they said was run by former colleagues from Amazon, and gave its consultants control over certain staff work. Two employees alleged that SKDK, a public affairs firm first hired by UCLA amid turmoil during pro-Palestinian protests, was used to pitch news coverage of Osako’s 2024 reappointment. One alleged that SKDK and another outside communications firm each received contracts “often for overlapping work.”
In court documents, Osako’s lawyers said the complaints accuse her of conduct “not reflected in the report’s ultimate conclusions,” including “misuse of public resources for personal gain and self-promotion” and “increasing vendor compensation without justification.”
A Cuore representative declined to comment. SKDK, which regularly provides The Times with official UCLA statements, referred questions to the chancellor’s office.
The post UCLA vice chancellor sues to block release of probe into allegations of bullying and misspending appeared first on Los Angeles Times.
