The "subsidy" idea is backwards. The financial support Q gets from roommates and family means her employer has to pay her more, not less, to keep her as an employee.

Suppose that Q works at WLOG, Inc for the pay, not for professional networking or for experience or anything else. Her real dream is to be an artist and spend all day painting, writing and composing music. But housing, food, and art supplies cost money and for now she doesn't think she can earn enough from art to live on. So she works at WLOG to pay the bills.

She gets a roommate. That helps with rent. She still can't quit and do art full time, but she feels more financially secure. Then she gets healthcare through family. That helps too! She's not comfortable enough to quit, but if for some reason she got a pay cut now she would quit and see if maybe she can make it in the art world. With rent-sharing and family healthcare, she doesn't need the job badly enough to accept $10 per hour!

Then she gets the family phone plan, and a distant relative dies and leaves her a monthly annuity. Jackpot! She gives notice at work. With all her financial advantages, she doesn't need the income from WLOG enough to justify giving up her art dreams.

How does WLOG respond? Do they say "We see you don't need income as much as you did before, therefore we invite you to continue working for us at a reduced salary"? No, if WLOG wants to keep her services now that she has outside income, they must offer her a raise. Imagine how much you would have to offer a millionaire to work as a receptionist.