Lessons from an Iowa workplace theft case

A recent Iowa City case involving a former University of Iowa employee accused of diverting nearly $1 million in university work to his own private business highlights a truth often missed in workplace theft cases: these failures rarely happen in isolation.

Brian Busch, a former manager in the university’s Department of Physics and Astronomy Machine Shop, pleaded guilty to first-degree theft and first-degree fraudulent practice after a State Auditor’s Office investigation found he used university labor, materials, and facilities to complete outside jobs for his own company. The audit concluded that nearly $944,000 in work was improperly diverted over several years.

While the criminal outcome has attracted attention, the broader lesson lies elsewhere—specifically in how workplace theft can persist when oversight breaks down.

The conduct described in the audit allegedly occurred over four years and involved hundreds of transactions. That scale alone suggests a systemic problem. When employees have authority over production, billing, or contracting and operate with minimal supervision, the opportunity for abuse increases dramatically.

This is especially true in large organizations, where layers of administration can obscure accountability. Internal controls are only effective if they are actively enforced and regularly reviewed.

After concerns surfaced, the university placed Busch and two other employees on paid administrative leave while investigations continued. During that time, nearly $473,000 in salary was paid to employees who were not working.

Paid leave is often used to reduce legal risk, but extended delays can be costly. For public institutions, the tension between protecting employee rights and safeguarding public resources is real. Still, prolonged inaction can erode public trust and raise questions about leadership and governance.

High-profile theft cases often focus on the individual accused. But auditors and the public also ask tougher questions: Who approved the contracts? Who reviewed invoices? Why were conflicts of interest not disclosed or detected?

Employer accountability does not require proof that management acted in bad faith. It requires systems capable of detecting misconduct before it becomes widespread.

Employer Best Practices

To reduce the risk of workplace theft, employers should consider:

These measures are not about distrust—they are about responsible management.

Workplace theft is rarely just an employee problem. It is often a systems problem. The Iowa case serves as a reminder that strong oversight, transparency, and prompt action protect not only institutions, but the people who depend on them.

When trust is paired with accountability, everyone benefits.

Wilford H. Stone is a lawyer with Lynch Dallas in Cedar Rapids. Comments: (319) 365-9101; wstone@lynchdallas.com.