Since publication of Commissioner Selig's memo regarding drug testing across all facets of MLB —not just players, a number of questions have come to light.
There are questions as to what would constitute testing of non-players not covered under any of the current testing policies. The memo simply states that non-player personnel not covered under either the MLB Joint Drug Treatment and Prevention Program, as well as the Minor League testing and Umpire testing programs, "may be subject to unannounced testing pursuant to the Program." What would the criterion be that removes "may be"? Does there need to be just cause?
There are questions surrounding whether this is simply instituting a drug testing policy that many companies in other industries have. If that were the case, it would run afoul of some state laws, as well as laws in Canada.
Lastly, there is the question as to whether there is a clear mandate as shown in one of the bolded passages of the memo regarding the penalties that Clubs might incur for not being forthright with information regarding possible drug use by players, including steroids or other PEDs.
As to the criterion for non-players, there seems to be a sense that there is none. That there need not be just cause and that they would be random. Random could mean never... could mean otherwise.
As to whether this mandate by Commissioner Selig is simply adding in drug testing without the direct ties to the controversies surrounding Major League Baseball as it pertains to PEDs, Rich Levin, a spokesman for the Commissioner's Office said, "I don’t know how our testing policy compares to other industries. Our policy is pretty clear about the prohibition of illegal drug use and the use of performance-enhancing substances."
Levin added, "In order to be consistent, the policy has to be applied to everyone in MLB, not just the players."