DRUG TESTING IN PROFESSIONAL SPORTS.   Term Paper ID:25741 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Evolution in 1980s-90s. Legal & labor-management issues, examples, punishment, types of drugs.... More...

7 Pages / 1575 Words 6 sources, 13 Citations, APA Format $28.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Evolution in 1980s-90s. Legal & labor-management issues, examples, punishment, types of drugs. Paper Introduction: Drug abuse in professional sports became a hot-button issue in the early 1980s, as several celebrated cases helped focus attention on the topic. This coincided with society’s changing attitudes about drugs as America moved from the lax 1970s to the more conservative 1980s. The major pro sports leagues in the United States responded by implementing drug control programs, which have largely succeeded in removing the topic from the headlines, or at least pushing it to the back pages. This paper will examine the drug testing of professional athletes, from the contentious first steps in the early 1980s until today, where concern over performance enhancing drugs has refocused the effort away from traditional illegal substances. Pro sports leagues derive their power to test athletes for drugs from collective bargaining agreements and the leagues’ by- Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. The NHL emphasizes treatment to a muchgreater extent than the other leagues, and so far has largely avoided thedrug scandals that have plagued MLB and the NFL (Markus, 1997). Nonetheless, California permits employers to test prospectiveemployees for drugs during the hiring process (after hiring, the employermay only test if it has a reasonable suspicion). In the case of drug testing, though, neitherCongress nor the U.S. Angels outfielder Tony Phillips was arrested in August of that forbuying crack cocaine. (1997). A second positive test results in a four-gamesuspension, without pay. In 1993, the two sides reached a labor agreement,their first in 11 years, which created a drug abuse program that includedregular testing (Markus, 1997). First, the NLRA states a preference for grievance resolution byarbitration. When they disagreed, the matter went to arbitration.That trial and error produced the rough outlines of a drug policy.Baseball only tests those players who have admitted to a drug offense, orthose players that MLB or the team reasonably suspect are using drugs. Dwight Gooden,at one time one of the game's top pitchers, missed the 1995 season becauseof a drug suspension. To date, no athlete has challenged a pro league's testingprogram based on state law. TheNational Basketball Association (NBA) began testing in 1983, after Bulletsplayer John Lucas admitted that he was addicted to cocaine, heroin andalcohol. The NBA's program is the model for other leagues. The sticking point in the NBA has always been that the league's listof banned substances did not include marijuana, making the NBA the only prosports league without such a prohibition (Markus, 1997). That will change,however, once the league implements a new labor agreement, for the twosides have already agreed on that point. All four filed filegrievances and had their suspensions reduced or eliminated (Stiglitz,1995). The MLB Players Association immediately challengedKuhn's action, and an arbitrator ruled in the players' favor. Several cases during the 198 s, most notably pitcherSteve Howe, prompted Commissioner Bowie Kuhn to take unilateral action.Kuhn, citing the Commissioner's power to act in the "best interests ofbaseball," adopted a rule that subjected any player to discipline forinvolvement in the "illegal possession or use of drugs or illegaltrafficking with drugs." In 1983, Kuhn suspended four players from the Kansas City Royals forone year because of their convictions for cocaine possession. Finally, in 199 , the league began testingfor anabolic steroids. TheCommissioner adopted rules regarding drug use, then tried to enforce them.The MLB Players Association accepted some of the Commissioner's rulings andobjected to others. "Drug testing fails the grade." TheToronto Sun, p. A surprise 11th test came uppositive and resulted in a one-year suspension for Lett. "Should drug and alcohol addictions becompensable disabilities under the NFL player retirement plan? A third positive test results in a lifetime ban,with reinstatement after one year if the player has no other misstepsduring that time. Hockey is a rough sport, and anecdotalevidence indicates that many players take amphetamines to ease the pain.In addition, performance enhancing drugs (steroids) have become popular(Buffery, 1998). Drug tests are apart of life for today's pro athletes, and these programs seem to havereduced the incidence of drug abuse. "The NFL and domestic violence: Thecommissioner's power to punish domestic abusers." Seton Hall Journal ofSports Law, 7, 353-37 . Another positive test results in a two-year suspension (Markus, 1997). "Sports world must stop playing gameson drugs." The Record (Bergen County, N.J.), A19. Thus,the player unions of each major sport have consented to drug testing, withsuch consent later ratified by a union-wide vote, though not in baseball. (Lucas recovered from that addiction and his success has made hima symbol of hope for other drug addicts.) Players who seek treatment arenot disciplined, but a second admission results in a suspension. A player with two strikes who is convicted of a drugcrime faces a lifetime ban. An ex-player from the 196 s and 197 s allegedthat the coaches use to hand out anabolic steroids during practice, andthen pass out painkillers on game day to help the battered players take thefield. He cited hisnew rule as authority. Pitcher Doc Ellis admittedto playing during the 197 s while under the influence of LSD. Darryl Strawberry, once one of the game's hitters,saw his career hit the rocks because of drug use. Some states have broader protections for individuals. The NationalLabor Relations Act (NLRA) requires an employer to bargain collectivelywith the representatives of the employees over mandatory subjects, whichare "wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment." Drugtesting is a "term and condition of employment" (Jefferson, 1997). According to some critics, the NHL has avoided those scandalsprecisely because it does not test. An analysisof the Sweeney case." Sports Lawyers Journal, 5, 2 5-219. Drugs also have producednumerous tragedies in all sports, most notably Len Bias, a star at theUniversity of Maryland. Second, and most important, the constitutional prohibition against"unreasonable search," which drug testing is, only applies to state actors. Therefore, for themost part, the only recourse for players is via their labor agreement'smandated procedures, and the outcome, as determined by an arbitrator, isalmost always final (Jefferson, 1997). Furthermore, a drug conviction counts against a player. "Player discipline in team sports."Marquette Sports Law Journal, 5, 167-188. Moreover, when it comesto collective bargaining and sports, the primacy of federal law trumps thatprovision of California law, so pro athletes would find no recourse in thatprivacy right. Supreme Court have extended any protection for thoseemployed by private entities. While the rest of society debates the privacy aspects of drugtesting, pro sports has largely cast aside that issue. Pro sports tolerated and even revered alcohol abuse for decades.Heroes such as quarterback Bobby Layne and center fielder Mickey Mantlealso were alcoholics, and their antics achieving legendary status. However, pro sports are not separatefrom society as a whole. Milton, M. As a result,the suspended players were entitled to procedural due process according tothe rules of the collective bargaining agreement. Courts have adhered to this line, displayinggreat reticence to become involved in such situations. At onepoint, he became irrationally angry at another player and tired to kill himby throwing a ball at his head. That drug policy has claimed some big names, though. This coincided with society's changing attitudes about drugs asAmerica moved from the lax 197 s to the more conservative 198 s. This system has often proven unworkable, as demonstrated by Howe'scase. Lewis, C. The National Hockey League's drug program, enacted pursuant to its1995 collective bargaining agreement with the players, does not involvetesting, at least not until a player comes forward for treatment or isconvicted of a drug offense. The union objected becausefirst offenders are never suspended, though MLB has no specific rule tothat effect. With only one test peryear, players have learned how to beat the system (Markus, 1997). Stiglitz, J. References Buffery, S. Another case in 1997 demonstrated once again how much is left indoubt by the tacit understanding between MLB and the players regardingdrugs. In the National Football League (NFL), forexample, several retired players have said that drug use not only wascondoned, it was encouraged. (1997, September 23). Markus, D. One coach purportedly said that if painkillers would help the teamwin, he would drive them in by the truckload (Milton, 1998). Afterthat, the player is subject to 1 tests per year, and alcohol is added tothe banned substance list. Congress believed that for collective bargaining to functioneffectively, the parties could not attempt to rewrite the agreement byconstantly going to court. The Celtics drafted Bias, but he never played agame for Boston. "Drug rules: positive results?"The Baltimore Sun, 1D. Pro sports leagues derive their power to test athletes for drugs fromcollective bargaining agreements and the leagues' by-laws. Eventhose with strikes against them have learned how to do so, or thought theyhad. L. The point would be moot anyway because theathlete would inevitably leave the state, and then the league could testhim there. The NFL tried toinstitute random drug testing throughout the 198 s, but opposition by theplayers killed those attempts. Those ills that afflict the broader communitywill continue to affect pro sports, regardless of drug testing. The majorpro sports leagues in the United States responded by implementing drugcontrol programs, which have largely succeeded in removing the topic fromthe headlines, or at least pushing it to the back pages. In addition, rookies are testedbefore they sign a contract. Hecontinued to be plagued by positive drug tests and arrests for possessionof cocaine until Commissioner Fay Vincent finally banned him for life in1993, Howe's seventh suspension. The history of drug testing in professional sports reflects theambivalence of the leagues. For some leagues, performanceenhancing drugs are a bigger issue. Many partsof federal law do apply to private actors, such as Title VII's ban ondiscrimination by employers. Any player who tests positive for bannedsubstances (illegal drugs or anabolic steroids) receives treatment. Besides, pro athletes are represented byunions, so even if Congress did place limits on private drug testing, suchrules probably would not apply in the collective bargaining context. Onlythose players who have known drug problems face random testing, and asdetermined by an independent expert on drug abuse, they could be tested upto four times in a six-week period. Thus, aconviction for marijuana possession immediately subjects that player to 1 drug tests per year. Major League Baseball (MLB) became the first pro sports league totackle the issue. He relapsed in 1983, thensat out the 1984 season after being suspended by the Commissioner. Jefferson, A. (1995, Spring). Baseball operated in this manner for more than a decade. The union challenged the suspension-andwon reinstatement for Howe again. Thus, neither the federal government nor the state governments can conductrandom drug testing of pro athletes, or anyone else for that matter.However, private employers can test their employees for drugs. (1998, July 31). For example, Cowboys lineman Leon Lett, who had already beensuspended for four games, received his 1 th test in the fall of 1996, so hefigured the NFL could not test him again. That outraged many, but it did notchange baseball's procedures. Not long after draft day he died from a cocaine overdose(Lewis, 1995). (1995, October 3 ). These agreements have rarely been the subject of litigation, for twoseasons. Drug abuse in professional sports became a hot-button issue in theearly 198 s, as several celebrated cases helped focus attention on thetopic. Asecond positive drug tests results in a 6 -day suspension; a third positivetest results in a one-year suspension. The NFL claims that its program, which isadministered by four regional teams of health professionals, has cut druguse by more than 5 percent (Markus, 1997). 116. The NFL's program involves a mandatory drug test for all players, onany date between May 1 and August 2 . Theirantics also claimed their lives (Smith, 1995). (1998, Spring). This paper willexamine the drug testing of professional athletes, from the contentiousfirst steps in the early 198 s until today, where concern over performanceenhancing drugs has refocused the effort away from traditional illegalsubstances. Still, allegations persist that the program is lenient on starplayers and that anabolic steroid use is rampant. California'sconstitution, for example, includes a specific provision guaranteeing theright of privacy, and that right is guaranteed against all actors (state orprivate). Howe first had admitted drug use in 1982. When he refused to enter treatment, the usual movefor a first offender, the Angels suspended him. While baseball has struggled with this issue, the other leagues wereadopting policies that encouraged drug abusers to come forward. Phillips eventually won reinstatement, but it highlightedbaseball's difficulties in this policy. If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.

Many of our Papers can be Downloaded From This Site!

PLEASE READ THIS, IT IS IMPORTANT!

Office hours are Monday through Friday, from 9 am to 5 pm (PST). You may place orders for custom research over the phone during office hours. E-mail requests can be made to our graduate and undergraduate department any time, and will be reviewed during office hours. You may also contact customer service any time through e-mail, and we will review your message during business hours. A great many papers can be downloaded right from this site, but not all of them. If you would like to know if a particular paper is downloadable, just look in the description for: "Available for Internet Download: Y" or "Available for Internet Download: N" If you wish to purchase a paper which is NOT available for immediate download, you will need to make other shipping arrangements. Also, please be aware that these orders are processed Monday through Friday from 9 am to 5 pm (PST). If you place your order after 4:45pm on Friday, it will not be processed until the following Monday morning. We charge $8 per page for all of our pre-written reports, plus shipping (and tax for California residents). However, the highest cost of any ONE report is $136, or 17 pages. Please, take a moment. Make sure you have chosen the report you want or need BEFORE you complete your order. If you are not sure, allow us to help you. We do not offer refunds or exchanges, so it is important for you to let us answer your questions during office hours. Reports which are e-mailed or downloaded are in Microsoft Word format. We are making more reports available for e-mail delivery faster than we can update our listings. Please call to check on the status of particular reports. There are many other shipping options which are listed on the Checkout page.