Since Zuffa LLC sold UFC to WME-IMG, fighter's unions and associations ave gained traction at least in the minds of fighters and retired fighters. Vice President of Athlete Development and Government Relations and 2-time Welterweight World Champion Matt Hughes has recently spoke out against the unions. In a Q&A on Friday, Hughes said he saw "no need" for a fighter unions. After those comments, Hughes received tweets from MMA fans,fighters and journalist asking him about his anti-union stance.
His response was unions are bad for business and job growth. He claimed the two biggest union states Illinois and California are "About to be bankrupt!". Hughes also stated unions would drive business cost so high, smaller organizations and young fighters would not have an opportunity. Doubling down on the sentiment, Hughes tweeted "True athletes get into the sport because they love it. Not for big $ down the road. Sorry."
Fighters who have been publicly pro-union or pro-fighter's association were amongst the ones to criticize Hughe's stance the most. Former UFC middleweight Nate Quary cited the theorized revenue split and Bellator Heavyweight Vinicius Queiroz told Hughes that he's struggling despite fighting for the two biggest organizations. Hughes replied "I just don't like unions. They WILL get corrupt."
The issue of unions was sparked by the four billion dollar price tag put on UFC when WME-IMG bought the company. When Matt Hughes first fought in the UFC in 2001, the company had just been bought by ZUFFA LLC for two million dollars. A few organizations have popped up since the most recent sale, The MMAFA is targeting to become a fighter's association that would simple organize it's members. The PFA is attempting to be licensed as a fighter's union and also wants solely to target the UFC because it's prominence.