I don’t believe so, as they don’t know my real opinions on the social and political stuff. Maybe three people out of the 300+ people there know that I didn’t have any positive thoughts to send toward drumpf during the campaign, and as I’m generally quiet and withdrawn when given the option, I was able to avoid discussions surrounding equality and such. The only thing I ever did in that regard was to wear a safety pin on my security badge lanyard, and I doubt anyone ever noticed it (most of the time my badge was in my pocket).
So no, as far as I can tell, it wasn’t a purge. Had it been one, there likely would have been some questioning.
As best as I can tell it was a combination of willful ignorance (don’t take the time to ask me what all goes into what I do, just assume that because I make it look easy then it must be so), petty office politics (I didn’t play their games or stoop to certain levels, I was there to do difficult work in a committed fashion and maybe they felt that made them look bad?), and a bit of jealousy. The jealousy part takes a bit to unpack… I and the department I managed were merged into a different group as part of a high-level power play a while back after my C-level boss retired… that vacuum was seized upon and we got absorbed into a group that was mostly at a lower pay scale, and while that VP wanted our group as a feather in the cap, I think he somehow felt as if his superiority was being threatened because of our general earnings level. I think he also realized that because of our similar personalities I could see right through his crap, and I assume that was probably threatening too. Just my hypothesis.
The one thing I did do which probably put me on the radar was to take a firm stand on the matter of pay inequality regarding one of the people I supervised vs the rest of the folks under my supervision. She (of course, welcome to evangelicalville) was being under-compensated by 30% plus vs the average of the others, and nearly 50% less that the highest earner (male) who had nearly identical seniority and career path progression as she did, but who had two more testicles and one less uterus than she did. My struggle with getting that addressed was a drawn-out process, but she ended up getting a raise of about half of the difference between herself and anyone else, with the “promise” of an additional adjustment the following year. Of course, a rarely-enforced technicality from the handbook (one of those ambiguously worded ones that can be easily weaponized) was brought forward shortly thereafter and she was given her papers. She chose to take a severance payment and not to fight the decision (which was handled in such a way that a lawsuit wouldn’t have had much hope, despite how easy it was for anyone paying attention to see why she had been targeted) and I respected her decision. I think that was probably what put me on the radar, but they couldn’t afford to immediately stick it to me without assuming too much risk. Almost exactly a year later though, and their butts are covered and my position can be deemed “redundant” (they’ll likely be surprised once they finally figure out what all I had been doing for them, I think I was sorely underestimated in that regard).
That was probably longer than you probably wanted to read, but further proof that “ministries” aren’t immune from being wolves in sheep’s clothing when it suits their purposes.
Good riddance to bad rubbish, as it were.
Edited for: punctuation/spelling errors