When you're hired for almost any job, one of the first things you'll do is sit down and mindlessly sign a bunch of paperwork that you never really read or pay attention to. There's a line that says signature and one that says date, and you blast through them, not truly caring or understanding what's on those forms. Buried among those papers, you can be sure there is some sort of code of conduct policy.
If you were to boil that policy down to its simplest terms, you could say that it more or less tells you, as an employee, to act right. If you do something illegal, immoral or unsafe, odds are you could face some type of discipline. As far as how severe the discipline will be, well, the words "up to and including termination" or something like that or usually included in that policy.
Until recently, the UFC was not an employer that had its fighters sign off on a code of conduct, instead the promotion relied on an unwritten standard. That all changed in January when the UFC announced that they were indeed rolling out a code of conduct that would cover all athletes under the UFC/Zuffa LLC banner.
Some viewed the code of conduct as a step back for the UFC, that the promotion was looking to silence outspoken fighters. Not so said UFC president Dana White at the time, "The last thing we would ever want to do is limit someone’s ability to communicate, to be who they are. That’s not what this is all about. This is providing some guidance to our athletes in writing that this is stuff you should stay away from.”
The fact is, the UFC code of conduct was needed to put the sport on even footing with other major sports. The UFC is a business, and as such, they need to protect that business, just like the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL need to protect their businesses.
I sat down with the NFL (via Post-Gazette) and UFC policies (via Yahoo.com) and took a look at them to see what they had in common and where they differed. What I found came as no surprise. The two policies are very similar, more or less covering common sense topics and detailing discipline.
Comparing the policies of the UFC and NFL, one will find that under the “Standards of Conduct” heading, both the UFC and NFL speak to some of the same subjects.
There is language in both policies that covers criminal offenses, performance-enhancing drugs, guns and weapons, violent, threatening and dangerous behavior and conduct undermining the league or promotion. The UFC does cover several items in their policy that are not in the 2010 NFL code of conduct, including specifics relating to e-mail, text messaging and social networks.
One interesting clause in the UFC policy, is one that UFC middleweight champion Anderson Silva recently ran afoul of.
That clause states that discipline may be imposed for “Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the organization or promotion of a UFC event, including without limitation, failure to deliver, engage in or otherwise execute any and all promotional responsibilities.” In short, don't show up for a media obligation, and you will be fined.
As for the disciplinary process, the NFL and UFC have several differences in that regard
Both the UFC and NFL state that individual discipline “may take the form of fines, suspensions” and release from employ, but the NFL adds a line that disciplinary process may include a probationary period. That period is absent in the UFC’s policy.
Also different is that the NFL states, “Unless the case involves significant bodily harm, a first offense will generally not result in discipline until there has been a disposition of the proceeding.” In other words, a first offender will have their investigation completed before a punishment is meted out.
The NFL also addresses repeat offenders a bit differently than the UFC. The big takeaway on these individuals is that in the NFL punishment on repeat offenders will be determined by the commissioner; the UFC does not make this stipulation.
Another key difference between the two policies is that the UFC reserves the right to consider the wrongdoings of an individual that occurred outside their time with the promotion. A big screw up in the past may not prevent a fighter from joining the ranks of the UFC, but mess up for the same thing while under their employ and it may come back to bite that fighter.
Both policies reserve the right to have the individual undergo clinical evaluation. Depending on the outcome of the evaluation, the individual may be required to have counseling, treatment or take part in an education program.
Another difference is who falls under the purview of these policies. The UFC’s code of conduct is titled “UFC Fighter Conduct Policy,” while the NFL’s is referred to as “NFL’s Code of Conduct.”
The NFL specifies that the policy covers, “all players under contract; all coaches; all game officials; all full-time employees of the NFL, NFL clubs, and all NFL-related entities; all rookie players once they are selected in the NFL college draft; and all undrafted rookie players, unsigned veterans who were under contract in the prior League Year, and other prospective employees once they commence negotiations with a club concerning employment.”
The UFC policy, judging by the fact that is referred to as "UFC Fighter Code of Conduct" is strictly related to fighters.
So, what does it all mean? It means if you act right, just as every employee of every company is expected to do, you''ll have nothing to worry about. Step out of line and use some ill-advised language that would not be accepted by any employer and you'll face repercussions, much like Nate Diaz did.
Michael Nagle/Getty Images
The argument that UFC fighters are a different breed carries no weight. Yes, it takes a special type of individual to step inside the Octagon and look to knock another person senseless or torque their limbs until they scream uncle, but they are first and foremost professional athletes, professional athletes who are employed by a corporation.
No one has to like it, but everyone, even men and women that punch each other in the face for a living, have to follow the rules if they want to remain gainfully employed.
