I think this is a bad idea. And your example illustrates why it's a bad idea...
That question was closed because it's overly focused on one company's dress codes and isn't something we can really help with - it should've been directed at the author's HR department, not us.
...But that's not why it was downvoted. How do I know? Because questions in that vein are asked every day and don't collect that many downvotes - indeed, some of them collect a fair number of upvotes!
The question got downvoted because the author comes across as an uptight jerk looking to make trouble for his coworker. The now-deleted comments attest to this as well.
Now, if folks want to downvote a question because they disagree with the author's position, that's their prerogative. But that alone isn't a good reason to close, nor to restrict the normal functionality available to askers. In particular, bounties exist to allow folks to promote particularly obscure or difficult questions - restricting them to questions that are popular or at best uncontroversial is in a sense restricting them to scenarios where they're not even needed.
In addition, This is much healthier points out that this would effectively damn anyone who bothered to fix an initially-bad question and attempted to use a bounty to seek redemption.