Chapter[ Summary & Recommendations ]
Section[ C. Governing Laws and Major League Baseball Policies ]
C. Governing Laws and Major League Baseball Policies
Anabolic steroids are listed as controlled substances under the federal Controlled
Substances Act. Since 2004, the dietary supplement androstenedione and other steroid
precursors have been as well. That means that it is illegal to use or possess steroids or steroid
precursors without a valid physician’s prescription. Violations of this law carry penalties similar
to those applicable to the illegal use or possession of narcotics. Human growth hormone is a
prescription medication. It is illegal to issue a prescription for human growth hormone except
for very limited purposes. Human growth hormone never has been approved for cosmetic or
anti-aging uses, or to improve athletic performance. Issuing a prescription for human growth
hormone for any of these unauthorized purposes is a violation of federal law.
Many have asserted that steroids and other performance enhancing substances
were not banned in Major League Baseball before the 2002 Basic Agreement. This is not
accurate. Beginning in 1971 and continuing today, Major League Baseball’s drug policy has
prohibited the use of any prescription medication without a valid prescription.7 By implication,
6 National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, Winning at
Any Cost, at 3 (Sept. 2000).
7 See Notice No. 12, Memorandum from Major League Baseball Office of the
Commissioner to Administrative Officials of Major and Minor League Ball Clubs Re: Drug
Education and Prevention Program, dated Apr. 5, 1971, ¶ 9 (“Baseball must insist its personnel
SR-10
this prohibition applied to steroids even before 1991, when Commissioner Fay Vincent first
expressly included steroids in baseball’s drug policy. Steroids have been listed as a prohibited
substance under the Major League Baseball drug policy since then, although no player was
disciplined for steroid use before the prohibition was added to the collective bargaining
agreement in 2002.
It is also inaccurate to assert, as some have, that baseball’s drug policy was not
binding on players before it was added to the collective bargaining agreement. Many players
were suspended for drug offenses before 2002, even though none of those suspensions related to
the use of steroids or other performance enhancing substances. Some suspensions were reduced
in grievance arbitrations brought by the Players Association, but no arbitrator ever has
questioned the authority of the Commissioner to discipline players for “just cause” based on their
possession, use, or distribution of prohibited drugs.
For many years before 2002, the Players Association opposed any drug program
that included mandatory random testing, despite several proposals for such a program from
different Commissioners. The early disagreements on this issue centered around testing for
cocaine and other “recreational” drugs, not steroids, but the effect of the Players Association’s
opposition was to delay the adoption of mandatory random drug testing in Major League
Baseball for nearly 20 years.
However, opposition by the Players Association was not the only reason that
mandatory random drug testing was not adopted. In 1994, Commissioner Selig and the club
owners proposed a drug program that would have included some forms of testing and would
have listed steroids among baseball’s prohibited substances. Robert D. Manfred, Jr., who is now
comply with the federal and state drug laws. It is your obligation to be familiar with these drug
laws.”).
SR-11
executive vice president for labor relations in the Commissioner’s Office, recalled that anabolic
steroids were included in the 1994 proposal to be proactive, and the decision to include steroids
in the proposal was not based on any particular concern about the use of those substances in
baseball at that time. He acknowledged that at the time the drug program was not as high a
priority as economic issues.
The Players Association did not agree to the proposal. Officials of the Players
Association said that the clubs did not appear to regard the 1994 proposal as a high priority and
did not pursue its adoption vigorously. Indeed, Players Association executive director Donald
M. Fehr recalled that the proposal never even reached the main bargaining table during
negotiations.
Later that year, a work stoppage ended the season and resulted in the cancellation
of the World Series. Play resumed in 1995 without a collective bargaining agreement, and the
owners made no attempt to renew the drug program proposal when collective bargaining
resumed. That bargaining resulted in an agreement that remained in effect until 2002, so the next
proposal for a mandatory random drug testing program was made in those negotiations with the
Players Association in early 2002.
In 2001, the Commissioner had unilaterally implemented drug testing throughout
baseball’s affiliated minor leagues. He used that program as the basis for his 2002 proposal to
the Players Association for a major league program. The proposal included many of the
elements of the current Major League Baseball joint program. Building from that proposal, the
Players Association and the clubs negotiated the terms of a joint drug program as part of the
2002 Basic Agreement. For the first time, there was a program; it provided for the possibility of
mandatory random drug testing of all major league players if more than 5% of players tested
SR-12
positive for steroids during anonymous survey testing in 2003. After that did in fact occur,
mandatory random drug testing began in Major League Baseball in 2004. That year, there were
12 undisputed positive tests for steroids. No player was suspended because the program did not
provide for suspensions of first-time offenders at that time.
The Major League Baseball Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program has
been modified twice since it originally was agreed to in 2002. In January 2005, human growth
hormone (along with seventeen other compounds) was added to the list of prohibited substances.
In addition, the Players Association agreed to more stringent penalties for a positive test for
steroids (or similar substances) including, for the first time, a suspension of ten days for a
player’s first positive test. In 2005, 12 players tested positive for steroids and were suspended
for ten days.
Later that year, further revisions were agreed to, including significant increases in
penalties: a 50-game suspension for a first positive test; a 100-game suspension for a second
positive test; and a permanent suspension for a third positive test. The penalties are unchanged
since those revisions. The penalties for positive drug tests under the major league program are
the strongest in major U.S. professional sports leagues.8 In 2006, two players tested positive for
steroids and were suspended for 50 games. In 2007, three players were suspended for 50 games
each for positive steroids tests.
In addition, in June 2006 Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher Jason Grimsley was
suspended for 50 games based on “non-analytic” evidence that he had violated the policy,
8 In major professional sports leagues in the United States, athletes are represented in
collective bargaining by players associations. Under federal law, drug testing is a subject of
collective bargaining and, in this context, requires the agreement of the players associations.
That is not the case with the Olympics or other traditionally amateur sports; there the governing
bodies may unilaterally impose any program of their choice.
SR-13
specifically, his reported admissions to federal agents that he had used steroids and human
growth hormone. In September 2007, Cincinnati Reds catcher Ryan Jorgenson also was
suspended for 50 games based on non-analytic evidence that he had violated the joint program.
In December 2007, two players, Jay Gibbons and Jose Guillen, were each suspended for 15 days
based on non-analytic evidence of past violations of the joint program.
Contents
Prev
Next
Last
