It's a good thing no one is making that argument. This article is about CEOs of large companies which handle millions of dollars daily and control about 1/3 of the lives of their employees:
> BRT redefined the purpose of a corporation from immediate profitability for shareholders, to a broader lens that includes customers, employers, suppliers and communities
> Isn't the "work should just be for work" attitude simply a political statement of its own—one in support of the status quo?
If we accept your premise, it allows for no neutral zones or moments in life. Every space is either actively political (by welcoming political expression) or is passively political (by excluding it).
Yes, we spend much more of our time at work than at weddings. But a workplace is also a captive space that people enter to support themselves, not for the purpose of associating with a particular group of coworkers. To me the captive nature of the space should lean even more towards political neutrality. A street preacher with a megaphone you can simply walk away from.
A wedding is a celebration where people have often come from far and wide. It may be the only time the two families will ever gather together at such a scale. It would be totally inappropriate for a guest to co-opt that moment to advance their own ideas about marriage, even if those ideas are just. Not every moment in life can or should be political.