Not exactly.

I think what you might be thinking of is that collective farms had state procurements, meaning that they were required to sell their produce to the government first, at fixed prices, in fixed quantities. So the collective farm and its members only retained the section of their produce that was left after they had met government quotas, and this could often be pitifully small. What was left to the collective farm was then distributed to members on a "laborday" (trudodni) system, which ranked collective members' work in terms of "labor days" (or days worked) over a year. A skilled worker, like a tractor driver, would earn days at a higher rate than the ordinary collective farm member, and chairmen earned at the highest rate (and also were considered to work every day, unlike your average farmer who only got marked down for days worked on the days they actually worked). Depending on the time and place, more skilled or senior members of a collective farm would receive a cash salary, while everyone else was paid out in-kind. It's also worth noting that whatever annual earnings were paid out to collective farm members are also what was left after the collective board decided on how much to retain in a capital fund for future farm use.

So earnings could be very meagre. But it's worth noting that this was not the only source of food or income for collective farmers. From 1932 onwards, collective farmers were allowed "private plots", that were in effect farmyards of something like an acre, but of varying sizes over time, that were usually in the immediate vicinity of a farmhouse. A collective farmer was allowed to grow whatever produce they wanted (more or less - the government occasionally attempted "sowing plans" for private plots, and also taxed the produce in kind produced there) as well as own cattle, and a significant portion of potatoes, meat, dairy and vegetables both for collective farmers and for the Soviet population were actually produced on private plots (collective farm acreage tended to produce cereals). While the state received procurements from the private plots, farmers were allowed to consume the remainder, or even sell it privately in local markets.

A significant number of collective farmers also earned cash income, whether from "otkhod" (securing temporary - or even permanent - wage earning work outside of the collective farm), or from salaried positions in the farm as mentioned above, or from private trading. Rural households also sought to maximize their economic positions by working both sides of the system: collective farm members were given a household private plot, but were not allowed to privately own a horse, so often a married couple would have one member join the collective farm, and the other stay out, in order to get both benefits.

It's also worth noting that while the system in the 1930s was very oppressive, and extracted a maximum amount out of farmers (Alec Nove estimates the average farmer was left with something like the equivalent of a loaf of bread at the end of the year. As I write here, there were occasions when this caused actual famines. (ETA: note, the major famines were in 1931-1933 and 1946-47, with a close call in 1936-7). But overall collective farmers were not solely relying on the collective farm produce for their livelihood, and starting in the 1950s the situation improved dramatically for them: the state raised procurement prices almost fivefold, more farmers began to receive salaried incomes, and by the 1970s collective farmers were eligible for pensions, national health insurance, and even a guaranteed minimum income.

Sources

Sheila Fitzpatrick. Stalin's Peasants

Alec Nove. An Economic History of the USSR