I'm glad I don't work at your company. "developers appear to [...] I strongly suspect"... I hope the decision to exclude an entire programming language that's popular almost everywhere is based on serious study rather than appearances and suspicions.
No, don't be silly; responsible companies don't pick and choose languages to exclude based on suspicions.
No... responsible companies exclude ALL programming languages except those that they can responsibly support -- you don't want the new guy writing some a critical piece of infrastructure in Haskell or Ada or Lisp or something because they feel it's morally superior, and then find out it can't integrate with some critical management system because it doesn't have the right bindings, or that it doesn't run on your upgraded production environment, or whatever. When you have tens of thousands of programmers, it's guaranteed to happen unless you proactively prevent it.
No, we have a handful of programming languages where we can guarantee that everything works, that the important infrastructure is accessible, that every library will remain supported until we replace it, that every vulnerability can be patched within a given timeframe, that code will run correctly on every machine, and so forth. Taking on a new language means dedicating a whole team of engineers to maintaining support for that language, indefinitely.
Some companies may be able to YOLO their way through decisions based on what what's popular at any given moment, but when you operate at any serious scale you have to be a bit more... responsible.
