Seeking clarification on Proudhon's Collective Force & Subsequent theory of exploitation

So, based on my current understanding of Proudhon's thought (heavily filtered through Wilbur and Ansart), collective force can basically be defined as the excess production that is possible when workers worker together compared to working apart.

So, like, collective force is the difference between what 1 individual worker could accomplish in 200 days compared to what 200 workers can accomplish in 1 day.

Proudhon's theory of exploitation is based on the idea that the capitalist pays the 200 workers the equivalent of what they would've paid the 1 worker (basically, they pay the wages = maintenance/means of consumption for workers) however they have produced more than that, and the surplus above their wages is appropriated by the capitalist.

However, it seems to me that following this logic leaves us necessairly at the conclusion that the exploitation of the INDIVIDUAL is impossible, exploitation solely arises from groups and that profit can only arise from group activity?

So like, if the source of capitalist profit is the difference between what 1 worker can accomplish in 200 days vs what 200 workers can accomplish in 1 day, doesn't that necessairly mean it is impossible for the capitalist to profit from non-associated individual workers, or that at the very least, exploitation of the INDIVIDUAL worker is impossible because the individual worker isn't part of a collective force association (not sure the right term, but basically an individual is not part of a group that generates a collective force)?

Is this an accurate understanding?