If you're catching HIV from people while at work you're probably doing work wrong.

If you're in a business where that's likely, guess what, mandatory HIV tests.

Unlike COVID, HIV isn't a respiratory infection that easily spread through breathing droplets exhaled by infected persons. Do you now see how the difference in the transmissibility affects what would be considered reasonable policy between the two diseases?

Sexual activity among people in the same workplace isn't exactly uncommon.

> Sexual activity among people in the same workplace isn't exactly uncommon.

But often prohibited during work, and when not generally not a job requirement, and when it is a requirement of a (legal) job, there's also a whole lot of intrusive requirements that would generally be considered peivacy violations in other work.

Breathing the same air as coworkers, though, is a practical requirement of in-office jobs, not something that might occasionally occur as an extracurricular activity during working hours despite being generally prohibited by policy or, if not, outside of requirements.

Outside of a narrow range of work - with existing STD testing regimens - people aren't supposed to have sex at the office. They are required to breathe, however.

Do see now how requiring a vaccine because it would mitigate disease transmission risk in real world scenario that's a requirement of in person work is reasonable, vs requiring it because two people might sneak off to the head to get the leg over?