Chapter[ III. The Governing Laws and Baseball Policies Regarding Possession or Use
of Performance Enhancing Substances ]
Section[ B. 5. Drug Policies Under Peter Ueberroth ]
5. Drug Policies Under Peter Ueberroth
In October 1984, Peter V. Ueberroth succeeded Bowie Kuhn as Commissioner of
Baseball. Even before he began in that position, Ueberroth acknowledged that one of his
primary responsibilities as the new Commissioner would be to address the problem of drug use
in baseball, and today he recalls accepting the position specifically to address that issue as well
as baseball’s challenging economic conditions. To Ueberroth, however, the use of anabolic
steroids or similar substances was “not really on the radar” at that time.
In Ueberroth’s first full year as Commissioner, 1985, the “Pittsburgh drug trials”
occurred, in which a number of major league players testified in criminal cases against Curtis
113 Wong & Ensor, supra note 82, at 793 (citing Murray Chass, Baseball Settles Drug
Issue, N.Y. Times, Jan. 30, 1985, at A16).
114 See Memorandum from Jennifer R. Gefsky to Robert D. Manfred, Jr. Re: 1984 Joint
Drug Agreement, dated Mar. 24, 2005, at 2.
115 See Letter from Donald M. Fehr to Sen. George J, Mitchell dated Nov. 30, 2007; see
also Rona Memo. at 9.
36
Strong and Robert McCue, who were charged with selling cocaine to players.116 In their
testimony, several players admitted using cocaine and implicated other players. The
Commissioner interviewed each of the player witnesses and other players who were named
during the trials, and some were subjected to discipline.117
In May 1985, Commissioner Ueberroth established a mandatory drug testing
program covering all employees in the major and minor leagues, including umpires and minor
league players. The program tested for drugs of abuse and amphetamines but did not test for
steroids or other performance enhancing substances. Initial positive tests were to be met with
treatment rather than discipline.118
The May 1985 drug testing program did not include major league players,
however. Ueberroth urged that mandatory drug testing be added to the joint drug program,
which was still in effect at that time.119 He recalled that the Players Association would not
116 See Associated Press, Conviction in Drug Trial, Sept. 27, 1985.
117 According to Ueberroth, no evidence emerged during these interviews relating to the
use of anabolic steroids or similar substances. The Commissioner suspended for a year those
players who had engaged in a prolonged pattern of drug use and had facilitated drug sales to
other players. Players for whom evidence showed some drug use but no involvement in drug
distribution were suspended for sixty days. Finally, no discipline was imposed on players for
whom there was little or no evidence of drug use. All of the players were subject to follow-up
drug testing, and the players who were suspended could avoid suspension by performing
community service and donating a portion of their 1986 salaries to a drug abuse prevention
program. Rona Memo at 6; see also Wong & Ensor, supra note 82, at 798-804. Eventually,
21 players were disciplined. See Murray Chass, Hernandez and Berra Consider Stances on
Ruling, N.Y. Times, Mar. 1, 1986, at Sports 7.
118 See Memorandum from Peter V. Ueberroth to All Major League Clubs Re: Baseball’s
Drug Education and Prevention Program, dated June 18, 1985; Telex from the Commissioner’s
Office to Distribution List Re: Baseball Drug Education & Prevention Program, dated May 14,
1985.
119 Press Release, Major League Baseball Office of the Commissioner, Ueberroth
Institutes Drug Testing for Baseball Personnel, and Urges It Be Included in Joint Drug
Agreement with Players (May 7, 1985); Letter from Peter V. Ueberroth to Donald M. Fehr and
Leland S. MacPhail, dated May 7, 1985.
37
consider such a program and rejected his proposed compromise for a program under which only
the Players Association would see the results of drug tests.
After his initial discussions with the Players Association failed, Ueberroth
appealed directly to major league players, urging them to volunteer for confidential testing under
the program with no threat of punishment.120 Days later, the Commissioner announced an
“overwhelming” consensus among players in favor of drug testing; his statement quoted
New York Mets manager Davey Johnson as having said that he “took a team vote which came
out 100 percent in favor of testing.” 121 The Players Association disputed the claims of
overwhelming support from players and objected to the Commissioner making an appeal directly
to them.122
In a 2002 interview, Marvin Miller, former executive director of the Players
Association recalled the events:
. . . one day in 1985 Ueberroth astonished Don Fehr and myself by going
on television during a national telecast and announc[ing] that he was
voiding the existing drug program because it didn’t have mandatory
testing. Don Fehr told him, in essence, to go to hell.
Incredibly, in 1986 he tried again. Without even bothering to
consult the union, he sent a letter to every major league player urging them
to submit to voluntary drug tests. The test results, he said, would be
‘totally confidential’ – and free of penalties – which made us wonder what
120 Memorandum from Peter V. Ueberroth to All Major League Players, dated Sept. 23,
1985. The Commissioner’s Office publicly announced the issuance of the memorandum the next
day. See Press Release, Major League Baseball Office of the Commissioner, Ueberroth Asks
Players to Rid Baseball of Drugs (Sept. 24, 1985).
121 Press Release, Major League Baseball Office of the Commissioner, Players Against
Drug Us (Sept. 26, 1985). A letter from the Commissioner to Don Fehr that day made the same
points and urged Fehr to work with the Player Relations Committee to develop the testing
program. See Letter from Peter V. Ueberroth to Donald M. Fehr, dated Sept. 26, 1985.
122 Letters from Donald M. Fehr to Peter V. Ueberroth, dated Sept. 26, 1985.
38
he hoped to gain. Don suggested to the players that they simply toss the
commissioner’s letter in the garbage.123
During the 1985-86 off-season, the owners tried a different approach to
implementing drug testing. Clauses were included in the contracts of approximately 550 players
that would have required players who signed the contracts to submit to drug testing upon their
club’s request. The Players Association filed a grievance, in which it asserted that the provisions
violated the Basic Agreement and that drug testing was a mandatory subject of collective
bargaining that could not be implemented unilaterally through individual player contracts.
The owners’ representative countered that the collective bargaining agreement did
not speak to drug testing and that the provision benefited players by “permitting [them] to
publicly disassociate [themselves] from the specter of drugs.” The arbitrators disagreed with that
argument, and they struck down the contract provisions on the ground that they violated the
Basic Agreement. The panel did not reach the question of whether drug testing was a mandatory
subject of collective bargaining.124
In April 1986, Commissioner Ueberroth again reached out to players directly,
urging them to support a drug testing program and proposing that testing be implemented only
for the next two seasons.125 The Players Association criticized Ueberroth again for contacting
123 See Allen Barra, Marvin Miller: Don’t Trust Baseball’s Drug-Testing Proposal,
salon.com, June 20, 2002. Miller continued: “When they finally got together, Ueberroth asked
Fehr if the union would agree to testing ‘even if it was just for the sake of public relations.’ Don
told me his jaw dropped; when he told me, mine dropped.” Id.
124 See Arbitration between Major League Baseball Player Relations Comm. and Major
League Baseball Players Ass’n, Panel Decision No. 69, at 5-6, 8, (July 30, 1986). At the time,
that issue had not been resolved as a matter of federal labor law, but in other cases soon
thereafter the National Labor Relations Board concluded that workplace drug testing was a
mandatory subject of collective bargaining. See Johnson-Bateman Co., 295 N.L.R.B. 180
(1989); Star Tribune, 295 N.L.R.B. 543 (1989); see Rabuano, supra note 82, at 453; Rippey,
supra note 82, at 146 n.18.
125 Memorandum from Peter V. Ueberroth to All Players, dated Apr. 4, 1986.
39
players directly and “exhorting” them to support the testing plan.126 No agreement was reached
with regard to mandatory drug testing of players in Major League Baseball then or for the next
sixteen years.
While the drug policy always had required clubs to report evidence of a player’s
drug use to the Commissioner’s Office, beginning in November 1986, baseball’s drug policy was
amended to provide for a fine of up to $250,000 upon any club that failed to make such a
report.127 This reporting requirement was included in every subsequent iteration of the drug
policy,128 and since 2002, the potential fine for a club’s failure to report evidence of drug use has
been $2,000,000, the maximum fine that the Commissioner may impose on a club under the
Major League Constitution.129
When I interviewed them in the course of this investigation, Commissioner Selig
and Bob DuPuy, the current president and chief operating officer of Major League Baseball,
confirmed that there has been no instance in which a fine for such a failure to report has been
levied against any club.
126 Letter from Donald M. Fehr to Peter V. Ueberroth, dated Apr. 7, 1986.
127 Memorandum from Peter V. Ueberroth to All Major League Clubs Re: Baseball’s
Drug Abuse Program, dated Nov. 26, 1986, at 3.
128 See Memorandum from Edwin M. Durso to All Major League Clubs Re: Baseball’s
Drug Abuse Program, dated Mar. 1, 1988, at 3; Memorandum from A. Bartlett Giamatti to All
Major League Clubs Re: Baseball’s Drug Use Policy and Drug Use Program, dated Apr. 19,
1989, at 3; Memorandum from Francis T. Vincent, Jr. to All Major League Clubs Re: Baseball’s
Drug Use Policy and Drug Use Program, dated Apr. 17, 1990, at 3; Memorandum from Francis
T. Vincent, Jr. to All Major League Clubs Re: Baseball’s Drug Policy and Prevention Program,
dated June 7, 1991, at 2.
129 See Memorandum from Allan H. “Bud” Selig to All Major League Clubs, etc. Re:
Baseball’s Drug Policy and Prevention Program, dated Apr. 12, 2002, at 3.
40
Contents
Prev
Next
Last
