Retail Wholesale & Department Store Union 1-S Rwdsu Afl-cio

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
135591972
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2125946910
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,646,167
Expenses
$1,664,517
Assets
$2,226,417
Liabilities
$184,268

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FELIX OCASIO (PRESIDENT)
  • SHERRY HAMILTON-ELDER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL JONES (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER MARTIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ALAN SUBVERI (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • FELIX OCASIO (PRESIDENT): $128,327 total reported compensation
  • MARC SINGER (TREASURER): $68,041 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL JONES (VICE PRESIDENT): $66,157 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Union representation

What it reported doing in 2025

Representation of union membership comprised of approximately 2,300 workers. Enforcement/negotiation of collective bargaining agreement(s). Promotion/advocacy of worker-members protections, rights & benefits, including betterment of conditions, improvement of goods/services, and development of greater efficiencies in the workplace. Implemented through regular meetings with membership & board, communications with employer, investigation/arbritration of grievances, participation in labor organization conferences, and publishing of union newspaper.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.1%; rating input score 96; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.1%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.34; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.3%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $128K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 31 current checks pass · 18 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLegal column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticIndividuals column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticOrgs column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Interest column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherEmployeeBenefits column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PaymentsToAffiliates column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PensionPlanContributions column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.