Employee drug testing, common throughout much of the business world, could have done wonders for Major League Baseball. An avid baseball fan, I’ve become increasingly frustrated with the Barry Bond’s controversy and all of the drama which surrounds it. Regardless of whether Barry is innocent or guilty, Major League Baseball could have avoided this public relations black eye if it had done something that the business world, and the rest of sports, has done for years: employee drug testing. Before 2002, the MLB did not test for steroid use among its players. While the rest of the sporting world was cracking down on a wide variety of performance enhancers, baseball evidently believed its players to be on a higher moral ground. Or perhaps, more sinisterly, the Commissioner’s Office and the Player’s Union decided to turn a blind eye to steroid use in order to help the game regain its popularity. It isn’t rocket science that fans enjoy sensational performances. Increased scoring and home runs equates to increased ticket sales and revenue. But it does so at a high price: the integrity of the game. Through the absence of strict drug testing policies, the past ten years have seen baseball’s home run records assaulted. In 1998, Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa both passed Roger Maris’ single season home run record. Today, McGwire is still waiting to get into the hall of fame and has all but admitted to taking steroids. Sammy Sosa still plays on, but he too is tainted with the “steroid user” legacy. And soon there will be Barry Bonds, all-time home run leader. But what does that record really mean if it was achieved through performance enhancing drugs?

Which brings me back to my point about Major League Baseball’s role in all of this. The Commissioner and the Player’s Union ultimately failed fans, its player’s health and safety, and most importantly the game by not including steroids in its drug testing. The stories coming out from former players indicate that it was no secret, on any level, that the use of performance enhancing drugs including steroids was rampant. If the rest of the sports world or the corporate world followed the example of the MLB, what would this say about American society? That the ends, no matter what they are, justify the means? By ignoring the most prevalent drug use for its employees, Major League Baseball failed. What would the repercussions for the corporate world be if it failed employee drug tests for the most prevalent drugs in their respected lines of work? Say for example, if trucking companies did not run background checks for substance abuse or drug test employees? This would never fly. If Major League Baseball had included steroids in its employee drug testing, we would not be dealing with a Barry Bonds controversy today.