No, it wouldn't. This type of logic only holds if we consider that drivers are automatons who can not analyze risks by themselves. Give the drivers autonomy to judge whether it's safe or not to deviate from the scheduled route.
I rather have a driver signaling me "No, I will not open the door now because I don't think it is safe" over "No, I will not open the door now because I can't break the rules". It makes me think of the driver less as a person and more as a brainless cog.
Rules are not the problem. Trying to apply one set of rules to every context is.
> People might overlook consequences or are not informed enough to make good decisions.
That happens regardless, so much so that "I was just following orders" defense has been tried many times before and never became morally acceptable.