Labor Politics Keeping MMA Out of New York
Adam Swift has a great piece on labor efforts to keep MMA out of New York. It is pretty clear at this point that despite public denials, labor issues in Nevada are at the heart of the legalization fight in New York:
The UFC has chosen to ignore the labor angle in its public efforts thus far, perhaps hoping to avoid confronting the issue all together, but has it becomes increasingly clear that its opponents are more committed than previously believed to delaying/defeating the legalization of MMA in New York. As this reality becomes clearer, the time is coming when the UFC may need to call a spade a spade. The current strategy is allowing the opposition to drive the debate without exposing their true motives which gives their arguments undeserved credibility.
He also cites the following information on the "poll" cited by Bob Reilly:
Gramercy Communications is a communications firm based in Downtown Albany that specializes in public relations, marketing, and public affairs. Founder & Principal Tom Nardacci earned his master’s degree in strategic communications from Columbia University, and his bachelor’s in history from Syracuse University. Tom has over a decade of experience as a public relations strategist, senior public affairs advisor and communications manager. Tom previously directed public relations for the Alliance for Downtown New York, lower Manhattan’s business improvement district, and he formerly managed communications and organizing for the 40,000 member retiree division of 1199 SEIU, New York State’s largest private sector labor union. Tom has served in leadership and consulting roles on dozens of federal, state and regional political campaigns, including as a field coordinator in Iowa for a United States Presidential Candidate. Adam suggested making the union angle public. I'd be interested to hear if readers here think that would be a wise move, or if the UFC should keep fighting that battle in the shadows.
5 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
So, the question becomes whether UNITE HERE should be exposed as to being historically… thorns in the ass of Zuffa because of a labor dispute in Las Vegas years ago. Also, it seems they’ve donated more money to the Democrats, were able to dispense complete crap information to politicians at the assembly, and do all sorts of other BS like make up fake polls.
My question is… what the hell is Zuffa doing? This all seems like little nitpicking PR stunts that are actually working. According to Payout, they donated $130k. What’s stopping Zuffa from throwing $500k at the Democrats to get this thing passed?
Ok, maybe that’s a step beyond what they should do, but I think taking this public will be exactly what UNITE HERE wants. Regardless of what Zuffa wants, UNITE HERE will paint a picture of Big Business vs. the Little Guy, even though it absolutely has NOTHING to do with MMA in general.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
now would be the time if there is one
with the public getting sick of goverment bailouts and the UAW recieving a fair share of blame for the auto industry mess.
but then you get in a war against unions in genreal and that would be zuffa biting off more then they can chew…
I would take the stance of exposing it. Only about 7% of the population actually works for an union. The rest do not. Look at the 3 of the biggest union industries education, auto, and airlines. Most Americans can look at these industries and come to the conclusion that none of those industries would be what they would call perfectly functioning or want to model business decisions (or anything) after them.
I would also put out there that looking at the election can clearly shows what happens when you don’t discuss the unions. Republicans chose not to point out union donations to demopcrats or address the Employee Free Choice Act in the campaigns (which passed the house right along a party line vote). What did it get them? They lost. Zuffa should expose this as an union dispute and put it on the table that they understand the union donated money but they are confident that as elected legislators they would do what is right.

by 











