What does this mean for the sport?
Since the notorious rise of Conor McGregor, mixed martial arts (MMA) has entered the mainstream and become one of the most-watched combat sports. The sport is known for its brutal knockouts, sneaky submissions, and infamous superstars that combine to create a dynamic, fast-paced landscape. Recently, a group of MMA fighters have taken the fighting out of the cage to the courts through a class action antitrust lawsuit against the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC), the most significant fighting promotion in the Western world.
The fighters allege unfair and restrictive contract practices that they argue limit their earning potential and infringe upon their rights as independent athletes. The settlement last spring amounted to a U.S. $335 million payout to the fighters, which was agreed upon by each party but denied by the judge. The new settlement, which the UFC agreed to in September, is now worth U.S. $375 million and is currently awaiting court approval. This lawsuit marks a significant moment in the world of professional combat sports by raising important questions about athlete autonomy and the power dynamics within the UFC.
Background of the Antitrust Lawsuit
The lawsuit, which includes several prominent fighters as plaintiffs, claims that UFC contracts are overly restrictive, binding fighters to long terms with minimal pay and limited opportunities for negotiation. Many of the fighters involved have expressed concerns that the UFC’s contract model effectively monopolizes their careers, forcing them into unfavourable terms that do not reflect the market value of their skills.
One of the key issues highlighted in the lawsuit is the UFC’s practice of making exclusive contracts that prevent fighters from competing in other organizations. This exclusivity often leaves fighters with limited options for career advancement and flexibility. The fighters argue that this practice not only stifles competition, but also contributes to a culture where fighter pay remains stagnant, despite the UFC’s soaring revenues and growing popularity. This was especially apparent during the COVID-19 pandemic when the UFC continued its operations despite COVID restrictions by hosting events in less restrictive countries. This meant that the UFC gained an even larger audience while other promotions suffered.
The plaintiffs also contend that they are not compensated fairly for the risks they take inside the Octagon in contrast with the revenue generated by pay-per-view events and sponsorships by the UFC. Fighters who want better pay would either have to change the sport they want to compete in or move overseas to less prestigious and competitive promotions that do not pay much more.
Some fighters also allege that the UFC has retaliated against those who speak out about their contracts or attempt to negotiate better terms, creating an environment of fear that discourages open dialogue about pay. The UFC can very easily slow down a fighter’s career by giving them either opponents far above their skill level or well below, so they do not progress in skill or increase their fanbase. In some cases, it is alleged that the UFC has just fired fighters who have entered into negotiations with another organization.
The UFC’s Response
In response to the lawsuit, UFC representatives have stated that their contracts are standard in the industry and that the organization provides significant opportunities for fighters to develop their careers. Even though they have proposed this settlement with the fighters, they claim that they have done nothing wrong in their business practices and are content with putting the issue behind through the $375 million figure.
Implications for the Future of MMA
This lawsuit could have far-reaching implications for the future of MMA, particularly regarding how contracts are structured and how fighters are compensated. Pricey lawsuits like these could change the way the UFC runs its business. One of the reasons why the UFC was able to become the premier promotion in MMA is its monopoly-like status. Essentially, if one promotion has most of the fighters, then there will be greater competition and difficulty in rising through the ranks, making those who made it to the top the elite of the elite. Although other promotions give fighters better options and pay, they split up elite fighters and cause the sport to lose its competitive edge as they face weaker or less-skilled competition. Should the fans then make the sacrifice for the sake of the fighters? Or should the fighters accept the plot and hope for the best?
The lawsuit by MMA fighters against the UFC is a pivotal moment in the ongoing conversation about athlete rights and the structure of professional sports contracts. Other athletes have become cognizant of such issues and begun fighting for better treatment by their employers through collective bargaining and legal action. With this lawsuit almost closed up and another one on the UFC’s radar, the sport may see big changes to come. MMA is quite the extreme example due to its inherent violence and associated health risks, but, hopefully, there is a compromise that can both support and protect fighters while retaining the high level of competition that is healthy for any sport.