solved Does simply following laws and policies make the employees of

Does simply following laws and policies make the employees of criminal justice organizations moral? When employees follow rules, policies, and procedures, are there fewer or greater economic impacts on organizations? Explain your answers. 
1st reply:
There is a morality that comes with following rules because it shows that a person has some form of self-discipline. Understanding that someone has to have the self-discipline to follow the rules gives them the freedom and understanding of how to expound upon the rules for their own benefit. After understanding the rules, a person is better able to understand the spirit of the rules. In law, there is a difference between the correct English definition of the law, and the actual spirit of the law. This is also the case with policy. I believe that morality comes with understanding both the dictionary definition of the law and the spirit of the law. I say this all with an astrix. If we go back to the Second World War, there is the story of Reserve Battalion 101. While they are more in the line of military police and not the public servant police, we are accustomed to, they still have the function of enforcing rules on those that the German army conquered. The reserve police battalion were not normal soldiers, they were both retired soldiers from the First World War and conscripted soldiers. The book Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland recounts a detailed and disturbing history of how they were used to murder mass amounts of civilians. It also details the psychological decline of these “Ordinary Men” and how they go from electricians, pharmacists, machine workers, to hardened murders because they were following the rules. With this in mind, simply following the rules does not make something moral or immoral.
Looking at an economic impact of following rules, there are most likely reasons that some things are done in a process while others are abstained. In any industry, there has been enough accumulated knowledge for how to do something. This could be the meat packing industry that led to the creation of ratings for meat-based products. For a criminal justice setting, we could look at critical incidents. There is generally a procedure for containing a hazmat situation, for example. If these rules are not followed, there could be consequences for the environment, population, or infrastructure that could have been avoided if specific steps were taken.
2nd reply:
The simple act of following a rule, whether its a policy or a law, does not justify somebody as being a person of good moral standards. More people behave out of fear of consequences then they do because it is what they want to do. According to the National Institute of Justice (2021), “The police deter crime when they do things that strengthen a criminal’s perception of the certainty of being caught. Strategies that use the police as “sentinels,” such as hot spots policing, are particularly effective. A criminal’s behavior is more likely to be influenced by seeing a police officer with handcuffs and a radio than by a new law increasing penalties” (Police deter crime by increasing the perception that criminals will be caught and punished). The fear that police will arrest you and you will be punished in the criminal justice system causes people to do the right thing.

The costs saved by staff members doing the right thing is borderline immeasurable. The cost for the employer to find, hire, train, and equip a new hire employee various from business to business, but one thing that is consistent is that it does cost employers. So when employees are loosing their jobs due to punishment for failure to follow rules, regulations, policies, or laws, the employer also then has to spend money to retrain another new employee to take the place of the terminated employee.