I don't get it.

I just don't get it. In sports, the players are always in unions, which makes sense. In that way they are no different from most proffessions out there. But I do not understand how these players unions can get away with blocking so many things, and appealing so many decisions.
I was just reading about 'the Pittsburgh Drug Trials' of 1985 where a large group of baseball players (mostly Pittsburgh Pirates) went before a grand jury and testified about cocaine use in baseball. The trial led to several arrests and convictions of drug traffickers, and many baseball players being suspended for a full year. After some bargaining, the players were allowed to play, but they had to donate a percentage of their salary to an anti-drug program, and complete some community service. Then the league tried to have mandatory drug testing for the players (I'm not sure if it was for all players in the league, or just these players), and the union would not allow it! My question is 'why?' Why would you stop the testing of these players? What possible reason could there be? This isn't even a steroid issue, which at the time was perfectly legal I believe, and not really an issue (I don't think many players were quite on the 'roids yet, though that was coming). This was a matter of an illegal drug. What possible reason is there for not allowing the testing for a drug that is known to be a problem? I don't by an invasion of privacy argument because the ones who are doing something illegal should be caught, especially if it is causing a problem (and being addicted to cocaine is an issue that causes real problems). The league is a business and it should have the right to ensure that its employees are following the rules in place. Those players who were not doing anything wrong would have nothing to worry about because they are doing nothing wrong.
And these player unions do stuff like this all the time. They are always appealing punishments and blocking policies and generally being a nuisance. I don't think that the owners of these teams should have carte blanche to do whatever they want, but the unions go too far, constantly allowing players to get away with stupid stuff all because they are trying to 'protect the players'. Hockey is especially bad. Any talk about suspending a player for rough play is met with immediate outcry from the player's union (that should have been hyphenated every time I used it in this post, but I'm not going back to change it)(consarnit) that the league is being too harsh and that they are just trying to look out for the suspended player's best interest. Meanwhile the guy he hit from behind into the boards can't play for three months because of a concussion. Yeah, I think you are protecting the wrong player.
I guess I see the usefullness of the unions, but I hate what they have become.
Consarnit.