Do MMA fighters need to unionize?
UFC executive Lorenzo Fertitta was asked at UFC Fan Expo 2010 about fighters unionizing. "We have no role," Fertitta said. "So we're not in a position to say we support it, or we're against it. That's entirely up to [the fighters]" he told mmajunkies.com.
One unofficial rule that seems to be carried out differently, is the lose-three-fights-in-a-row-and-you’re-out rule. But that rule isn't carried out for all fighters. Light heavyweight Tito Ortiz has one draw and four losses in his last five fights, but he is still employed by the UFC. It’s being reported that Ortiz is not only fighting in Ultimate Fight Night 24 in March 2011, but he’s headlining the event. Veteran fighter Keith Jardine had to lose four fights in a row to be released from the UFC. Recently, lightweight Chris Horodecki was released after losing one fight.
The UFC also released Gerald Harris after losing his last fight; he had won three fights in a row. Two of his fights were awarded “Knockout of the Night.” The UFC releases him after one bad performance. His loss to Maiquel Falcão snapped an official 10-fight win streak.
UFC president Dana White expressed his displeasure with Harris at the post fight news conference when he said, “This isn’t the [expletive] Ultimate Staring Competition, it’s the Ultimate Fighting Championship.”
But this is another Dana White decision made without thinking it through, just like the comment he made about MMA trainer Greg Jackson's fighters not consistently finishing fights. Several UFC fighters have told me that’s just Dana White talking before he thinks.
Fighters being unfairly released is not the only issue. Fighter purse is a big issue as well. Veteran MMA fighter Gary Goodridge fought Gegard Mousasi at FEG's "Dynamite!! 2009" and complained that the promotion didn’t pay him for the match. It’s been more than a year and he is still waiting.
In the UFC, fighters’ payment is a problem, and the amount that fighters are earning is also a problem. How do you pay Matt Hamill $29,000, with a $29,000 win bonus and pay his opponent Tito Ortiz $250,000 to fight. Ortiz hasn’t won since 2006 when he last beat 42-year-old Ken Shamrock.
Now, I do take my hat off to Tito Ortiz for standing up to White in the past and now this could be a case of the squeaky wheel getting the oil. In 2008, Yahoo Sports reported White saying, “(Ortiz) is one of the most dishonest human beings I’ve ever met,” White said. “I put up with him when he was a good fighter. He’s not anymore. He’s done. I’m no longer in the Tito Ortiz business.”
How can you pay him a quarter-million dollar to fight and he loses his fourth fight in a row and still employed?
“These are the big-leagues, man,” White said. “It’s no different than Major League Baseball, no different than the NFL. You perform, or you go away.”
Yes there are differences; the NFL and MLB have rules that are the same for everyone. The players union makes sure that management upholds the rules, that favoritism in the workplace isn’t tolerated and that rules aren’t made on one man likes or dislikes.
If the UFC ran its organization like the NFL or MLB you wouldn’t have hall-of-fame fighters insinuating to the media about being mistreated. Randy Couture told Sherdog.com, "I think the final straw for me was meeting with Dana and Lorenzo (Fertitta, UFC co-owner) where they claimed I was the No. 2 paid athlete in the organization, which I know is a bold-faced lie," Couture said. Polling other athletes, said Couture, he learned that his compensation — some $250,000 a fight with pay-per-view bonuses, according to the Couture camp — was nowhere near what other top UFC fighters were making.
"All us athletes are all pretty tightly intertwined," he said. "You hear what other guys were paid signing bonuses and what other guys were paid on the record and off the record with bonuses. I've heard Chuck's numbers. Tito's numbers. Hughes' numbers. Quinton's numbers. Cro Cop, Wanderlei. I heard what they were offering Fedor, and it's insulting."
Strikeforce and former UFC fighter Dan Henderson when asked if he missed being in the UFC, he said, “I have no regrets as far as in leaving the UFC and Strikeforce they are good to the fighters. They don’t take advantage of the fighters; it’s refreshing.”
MMA veteran Matt Lindland told Eddie Goldman, he doubted fighters ever would unionize and placed blame on poor representation.
"Unless you can get the top athletes, you're not going to [unionize]," said Lindland. "The fighters [are] all [opportunists]; they just fight for the biggest purse, and it's going to be tough unless you could somehow get all the fighters to agree to something like that. There's always somebody going to come up underneath who's not willing to do it.
"There's enough support [for a union], but these guys outside of the cage or outside of the ropes are cowards. You know they would not dare stand up to the powers-that-be."
What are your thoughts on fighters creating a union?
Kevin Richardson has been a fan of mixed martial arts competition ever since UFC 3, when 600-pound sumo wrestler Emmanuel Yarborough was beaten by Keith Hackney. Kevin will cover the world of MMA — in Baltimore, nationally and internationally. He plans to take readers into the locker rooms and MMA schools, where they'll hear from local fighters and trainers. If you have a news tip or suggestions for the blog, please 
Comments
I have to totally agree with your sentiments, I had read a article from Fighter's Only discussing how the fighters don't even have rights to their persona because the UFC can use them in action figures, video games, and various other venues without fighter permission because they are with the UFC and should be thankful. I'm not saying that its only the UFC but using the UFC as example since most fans deem it to be mma in general, there has to be some accountability and representation for the fighters who are the draws to get paid fair compensation. No matter how much people like to sugar coat it, these mma organizations are biased especially the UFC to certain athletes because of their charisma rather than abilities, Matt Lindland had even come out with doc discussing this.
Posted by: mmafanatic | December 31, 2010 3:50 AM
In two words, hell no. Extrapolating from that:
1) The UFC is a business, and who gets cut is a business decision. That process does not need to be clear cut, even though it actually is. You don't perform, you get cut. Doesn't get any clearer than that. Plus, no fighter is entitled to fight in the UFC. If the UFC decides to cut Gerald Harris but keep Tito Ortiz, that's their call. It isn't "unfair", it's business. Tito is still brings in money for them. The UFC wouldn't be as successful as they are (translate: putting on 20+ fights a year) if they didn't implement "unfair" business decisions.
2) Prizefighting is a business. When a fighter signs a contract to fight for a shady Japanese promotion, they are electing to do business with that promotion, and they do so at their own risk of not getting paid. Why should fighters be afforded any more protection than the rest of us when doing business with shady people? If fighters can't get contracts with reputable promotions, that failure rests squarely on them and their management.
3) I want life-long company subsidized health-care too. That would be fantastic, but do I deserve it? Am I entitled to it? Under the current system, I am not. So why should a fighter be more entitled to it than anyone else? They chose their occupation and it would behoove them to maintain their own health insurance. If they can't afford it, then they should face reality and seek alternative solutions. But a big ugly union to address long-term healthcare for fighters is a bit much.
4) Who the hell are you, me, or anyone else to decide what the UFC should pay fighters? Where does it say that a fighter who loses 3 in a row should be paid less than a fighter who is on a 5 fight winning streak? If the guy coming off 3 losses is a bigger draw than the guy who is winning all the time, then perhaps it is justifiable to pay him more. Or whatever business logic the UFC uses to pay their fighters is entirely their decision as a private company. If fighters don't like it, they have other (albeit less attractive) options available to them.
And as an aside, where does it say that a fighter is entitled to earn a living wage from their purses? This one has always confused me.
5) Randy Couture is a primadonna. He is bitching about HIS purse. He could give a crap about what the little guys are making. He's butt-hurt that he's only getting
6) If the UFC ran their organization like the MLB of the NFL, then we would eventually have fighter strikes, like the one that killed my love for baseball back in the 90s. How does anyone involved benefit from a strike? It's the worst possible thing for the fans, the fighters (who are not fighting or getting paid. sponsorship dollars dry up, etc), and the UFC. Nobody wins from fighters striking. Besides this, there are a number of other reasons I am thankful that the UFC is not run like the NFL or MLB, but I'll defer.
7) You make it seem as if unions are God's gift to workers. I would disagree. I think the benefit they provide to workers (or fighters in this case) is dubious at best. Historically, they are corrupt money-hungry organizations that exist for the primary purpose of peddling influence, not protecting workers. They exist to disrupt business. I work in high tech, and our industry wouldn't have flourished like it did if it were under the influence of organized unions.
8) Lindland is exactly right. Fighting is a solitary support and fighters, by their very nature, are largely out for themselves. And that's how it should be. The fighter who can pull together the combination of good performances, competent management, good marketing and self-promotion, and smart business decisions will be successful. Those that can't, won't. And that's the beauty of our capitalist system.
What it comes down to is this, really. The idea of unionized fighters is lacking in pragmatism. Sure, it might make me feel all warm and fuzzy if I knew my favorite fighters were living their dream of being a high-paid prize-fighter with unparalleled health benefits, but is it pragmatic? Not at all.
P.S. The user interface for making comments on this blog is horrendous.
So Josh, tell me what you really think. LOL
Thanks for the comment, Bro -Kevin
Posted by: Josh D | January 1, 2011 4:17 PM
I don't think the UFC should complicate things with a Union.
As far as pay goes, let the market determine that. If a fighter draws a big crowd, its up to his promoter and team to negotiate their price.
aside from that, I think Josh D summed it all up pretty well.
Posted by: Mixed Martial Artist | January 2, 2011 2:04 PM