Well, not in most cases anyway:
All joking aside, having names that reflect your character(s) are worthwhile if you can do it well. Not anything too Dickensian - what kind of name is 'Pumblechook anyway?' - perhaps, but meaningful names can serve the writer well.
David Lodge admits that he wanted too get the names right for his splendid novel Nice Work (in short, it's a modern spin on Elizabeth Gaskell's North & South). One of his main characters, Robyn Penrose, is a feminist lecturer in English literature. In an interview, he reveals that he gave her the surname 'Penrose' because 'pen' indicates her love of literature, whilst 'rose' suggests her beauty.
The other principal character, Vic Wilcox, is a no nonsense manager at an engineering firm, with a, shall we say, traditionally masculine approach to gender politics. Does that surname give you a clue?
There's a reason for the first names as well: Robyn is required to spend some time in Vic's workplace on a kind of 'work exchange' program, and Vic assumes that it's going to be a Robin Penrose he will be entertaining. The subsequent deflation of Vic's prejudices is a great plot device that Lodge exploits to the full.
There are other, subtler examples as well. For instance YA author Sally Nicholls (according to Wikipedia, she and I were born on exactly the same day, incidentally...) has related how she spent some time changing the name of her MC in Ways To Live Forever because his original name was too 'girly'. This suggests that even seemingly 'neutral' names can be important.
What do you think?