While there is precedence in past scandals to feed such ideas, Nullsec groups with already heavy mining operations will profit from the changes and a number of CCP Devs originally comes from Nullsec groups, you shouldn't mix up correlation and causation. Put your tinfoil hat away for a moment and think about it from this perspective: Changes to mechanics are at least in some way always influenced by players raising awareness or taking part in discussions. There is no need for some kind of back-channeling with CCP Devs by any Null group to be able to have greater influence on such changes than any smaller group or solo player. It is simply that a group of 1000 players yields a stronger voice than 5000 solo players because the first will be far more visible and taken more seriously. EVE is advertised as a universe in which players, given basic mechanics, create most of the game themselves. Everyone takes part in that, no matter if conciously or not. Large groups do, solo players do. The difference is often that a solo (non twitching) player has far less gravitation. Now for CCP or any Dev it is far easier to understand and magnify for advertisement purposes what large groups (esp. Nullsec) are doing, than for solo/small group players respectively. Concerns by solo players are seen as single opinions and not as expressions of a coherent experience thousands of players make. And to be fair it is pretty hard to distinguish self-serving ■■■■■■■■ from solo-guys from something that many people have a problem with.
So, I think you're wrong in your assumption that Goons or whoever has to go an extra mile to influence CCP in ways, that Devs would risk to lose their jobs. On the downside, I think CCP often enough falls into the trap of mixing up correlation and causation as well, when they try to perceive the realities of EVE. Meaning that in my eyes they have no really good way of understanding how the entirety of their mechanics makes the game much less a universe of possibilities for everyone than they like to advertise it. If someone could provide coherent data of how a large amount of players is by mechanics put into a corner of no-fun limited amount of choice and how this leads to low retention rates and basically no growth in number of players, I bet CCP would immediately start changing things big-time. The constant lobbying by large groups is surely a small part of why this is not happening, but really only a small part and surely not anything they'd need to secretly influence CCP Devs with.
P.S. things that have been said years ago should not be taken as granted forever. Large groups have probably way more work to do adapting to such changes than high-sec dwellers, but I'm part of neither, so I can only assume.