The old notion that white-collar criminals are given a slap on the wrist is giving way to a new reality of tough sentences being handed down for corporate malfeasance - particularly in high-profile cases.

Last week, Bernard Ebbers, the former CEO of Worldcom, was sentenced to 25 years in prison. At 63, Ebbers will likely spend the rest of his life behind bars for his role in the collapse of the once-high-flying telecom company that he built. In addition to the virtual life sentence, Ebbers has already forfeited almost all of his personal fortune, valued at more than $40 million.

The $11 billion accounting fraud at WorldCom is the largest such case in U.S. history, and Ebbers is in the final act of a dramatic and rapid descent from high-profile corporate cowboy to a humbled, teary defendant pleading for leniency before a federal judge.

Ebbers joins former Adelphia Communications officials, founder and former CEO John Rigas and his son, Timothy, in facing serious jail time for corporate crimes. Several weeks earlier, the senior Rigas, age 80, was sentenced to 15 years in prison, and former chief financial officer Timothy Rigas, 49, will serve 20 years in prison. The two were convicted of looting cable giant Adlephia of billions of dollars, deceiving investors and essentially using the company, which the elder Rigas founded, as their personal piggy bank.

Last month, former Tyco executives Dennis Kozlowski and Mark Swartz were convicted and now each faces up to 30 years in prison. Kozlowski, former CEO, and Swartz, former chief financial officer, are going to jail for their part in looting the conglomerate of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Clearly, the consequences for corporate malfeasance are changing. There was a time when white-collar crime earned a mere slap on the wrist, but the recent judgments against Ebbers, John Rigas, Kozlowski and others are demonstrating that federal officials - under sentencing guidelines toughened after corporate scandals broke in 2002 - are determined to punish corporate wrongdoing.

Generally, the tougher federal sentences are supported by a public upset over highly paid executives gaming the system and, with the direct or indirect support of hapless boards of directors, enriching themselves beyond their multimillion-dollar salaries. An element of revenge also is evident in the many thousands of small investors who lost major portions of their life savings as a result of plunging stock prices brought about by corporate scandals.

Some observers suggest, however, that the pendulum has swung too far, and a life sentence is too harsh for a crime in which no lives were lost. Commenting on the Ebbers sentence, one attorney noted that he would be spending less time in jail if convicted of manslaughter.

Those who argue that these 20- and 30-year sentences are extreme have a point. If the purpose is to deter future corporate misdeeds, it would seem that 10 years behind bars and a near-total stripping of accumulated assets would be effective.

Whether or not the tough sentencing guidelines for corporate crimes are moderated, the message is clear and can hardly be missed by those sitting in corner offices across the country.