More than that, however, is the idea that steroids and steroid testing will be addressed outside of collective bargaining. In a normal context, the players union's concern for the privacy of its players and the independence and accuracy of the testing procedure would be considering along side other proposals.  The owners would rather negotiate concessions from the players union in these other proposals that would benefit their bottom line rather than negotiating to get a stronger drug testing policy. Now there are calls to implement this stronger policy as soon as possible - before the collective bargaining agreement expires allowing the owners to have a much stronger position in the next round of dividing up the profits of a multi-billon dollar business.  

The MLBPA is only a union in a loose sense, it doesn't negotiate salaries or complete terms of employment, only standard language common to all baseball contracts.  Nevertheless it is routinely referred to as the strongest labor union in America.  If true, and it is arguable that it is considering its undefeated record in past labor disputes, is a sad state of affairs for American labor.  Donald Fehr, the head of the MLBPA, has roots in labor and sees himself as a legitimate if not leading labor and civil rights advocate. The players associations position on mandatory, random drug testing is that it is a violation of privacy guaranteed in the fourth amendment and presumes guilt by the players. These points were made in testimony to congress, and Fehr has publicly drawn the analogy that just because a lot of people illegally own guns it doesn't give the government the right to randomly search everyone's house without a warrant.  Furthermore, the players association argues that normalizing random testing in the sports world would lead to these practices becoming common in workplaces across the country. To show their good faith, the union has made on a number of occasions counter proposals to random testing with the basic idea being that the league would have to demonstrate some "probable cause" before a player would submit to a test and that positive results would lead to rehabilition, not punitive action.  

Instead of dealing with the issue of steroid abuse and the counter-proposals, the owners have used the players associations concerns to smear the MLBPA for "undermining the game".  The idea that the MLBPA's position on steroids is undermining the game is at best overstated.  There is no evidence that steroids directly or significantly improve baseball performance which has always remained foremost a contest of skill rather than physical ability.  In fact, for the majority of baseball history the approach has been to not bulk up or lift weights.  But even if steroids are responsible for the recent surge in home run productivity, it is clear that the owners blind eye and failure to seriously deal with the issue is somewhat responsible as well.

Before you accuse me of me crying tears for millionaire athletes, let me remind you of the advantages of being a baseball owner.  Other than player contracts, the operating expenses for clubs are the relatively small cost for travel and operation and the ballpark itself.  In an age with multi-billion dollar TV contracts, it is a rather lucrative enterprise. On top of that, the ballpark, which is by far the biggest expense is usually financed by taxpayers.  Owners in recent decades have discovered that they can hold entire municipalities hostage under the threat of moving elsewhere with impunity unless the cities taxpayers agree to publicly finance a new ballpark with favorable lease arrangements, increased luxury boxes and expensive seats, and the ability to sell naming rights.  All in all, not a bad racket, especially when you consider the exclusive anti-competitive, monopolistic rights clubs have to entire regions or cities because of baseball's ridiculous anti-trust exemption.

On the one hand, you have corporate owners who are cynically exploiting a moral issue to further their bottom line and increase their stake at the negotiating table outside of the long standing tradition of collective bargaining.  On the other side is a group that is raising legitimate  concerns and making responsible counter offers but is being smeared in the press and by the owners.  Sound familiar? Not surprisingly, Republicans have threatened to intervene on behalf of the owners, which is just fine by baseball owner/commissioner Bud Selig. Democrats, who are trying to better articulate values of promoting civil liberties, defending the cause of the common taxpayer, labor, and opposing corporate malfeasance, have had relatively little to say.